PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jan 25, 1995
Sets forth the rule for the consideration of H. Con. Res. 17 (relating to the treatment of Social Security under any constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget) and H.J. Res. 1 (proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution).
People & committees
Rep. Solomon, Gerald B. H. [R-NY-22] · R–NY
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: 255 - 172 (Roll no. 39).
House roll call 39 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 255 - 172 (Roll no. 39).
House roll call 39 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 233 - 196 (Roll no. 37).
House roll call 37 · Individual votesORDERING THE PREVIOUS QUESTION - At the conclusion of extended debate, the Chair put the question on ordering the previous question on the amendment and the resolution. By a voice vote, the Chair declared that the ayes had prevailed and subsequently, Mr. Moakley objected to the voice vote based on the absence of a quorum and the Yeas and Nays were ordered.
EXTENDED DEBATE - Mr. Solomon asked unanimous consent for an additional period of debate for not to exceed 10 minutes equally divided and controlled, for the purpose of discussing the amendment. Agreed to without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H605-619)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 3.
Rule provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 17 and H.J. Res. 1 with 4 hours of general debate. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate in the House on H. Con. Res. 17, and 3 hours of general debate on H.J. Res. 1. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution to final adoption without intervening motion. Specified amendments are in order. It shall be in order to consider H.J. Res. 1 in the Committee of the Whole, with 3 hours of general debate. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Comittee on the Judiciary printed in the joint resolution shall be debatable for one hour. No furter amendment shall be in order except those designated in section 3 of this resolution, if offered in the order and manner specified. If more than one amendment is adopted, the amendment receiving the greatest number of affirmative votes shall be considered as finally adop...
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-4, by Mr. Solomon.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-4, by Mr. Solomon.
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. 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.44 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.44 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.44 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.44 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.