PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 8, 1994
Amends rule XLIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives to require the chairman or ranking minority party member of a standing, select, or special committee of the House or of a joint committee of the Congress, or any subcommittee thereof, who is indicted for a felony for which a sentence of two or more years imprisonment may be imposed, to cease to exercise the powers of chairman or ranking minority party member and to step aside in favor of the next ranking member of the committee or subcommittee who shall serve as acting chairman or acting ranking minority party member unless or until the charges are dismissed or reduced to less than a felony for which such sentence may be imposed.
People & committees
Rep. Reynolds, Mel [D-IL-2] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H4170-4171)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Feb 6, 2024. 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.448 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.448 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.448 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.448 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.