PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 20, 1998
Sets forth the rule (open) for the consideration of H.J. Res. 119 (campaign spending limitation). Sets forth the rule (modified open) for the consideration of H.R. 2183 (campaign financing).
People & committees
Rep. Linder, John [R-GA-11] · R–GA
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 voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.
On ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 208 - 190 (Roll No. 186).
House roll call 186 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H3722-3733)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 194.
Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 119 and H.R. 2183. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Upon the adoption of this resolution, the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for consideration of H.J. Res. 119. General debate shall be limited to one hour. After general debate the joint resolution shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered as read. Bill is open to amendments. At any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the the bill H.R. 2183. General debate shall not exceed two hours. Befo...
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 105-545, by Mr. Linder.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 105-545, by Mr. Linder.
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.442 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.442 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.442 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.442 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.