PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Houchin, Erin [R-IN-9] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 217 - 212 (Roll no. 142). (text: CR H2220)
House roll call 142 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 217 - 212 (Roll no. 142).
House roll call 142 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 213 - 211 (Roll no. 141).
House roll call 141 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 436.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On consideration of the resolution. Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 211 (Roll no. 140).
House roll call 140 · Individual votesMr. McGovern moved on consideration of the resolution.
POINT OF ORDER - Mr. McGovern raised a point of order against the provisions of H. Res. 436 on the grounds that the resolution violates section 426(a) of the Congressional Budget Act. The Chair announced that the disposition of the point of order would be resolved by the question of consideration of H. Res. 436. The House proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the point of order at the end of which the Chair will put the question on consideration as the statutory means of disposing of the point of order.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On consideration of the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 217 - 211 (Roll no. 139).
House roll call 139 · Individual votesMr. McGovern moved on consideration of the resolution.
POINT OF ORDER - Mr. McGovern raised a point of order against the provisions of H. Res. 436 on the grounds that the resolution violates section 9(c) of the Congressional Budget Act. The Chair announced that the disposition of the point of order would be resolved by the question of consideration of H. Res. 436. The House proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the point of order at the end of which the Chair will put the question on consideration of the resolution.
By direction of the Committee on Rules, Mrs. Houchin called up H.Res. 436 and asked for its immediate consideration.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H2220-2235)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 29.
The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 1 under a closed rule with two hours of general debate and one motion to recommit.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 119-113, by Mrs. Houchin.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 119-113, by Mrs. Houchin.
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.Res.436 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.Res.436 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.Res.436 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.Res.436 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.