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 · Jan 27, 2014
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the bill (H.R. 7) to prohibit taxpayer funded abortions, and providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2642) to provide for the reform and continuation of agricultural and other programs of the Department of Agriculture through fiscal year 2018.
People & committees
Rep. Foxx, Virginia [R-NC-5] · R–NC
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 the Yeas and Nays: 224 - 192 (Roll no. 27). (text: CR H1443)
House roll call 27 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 224 - 192 (Roll no. 27).(text: CR H1443)
House roll call 27 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 222 - 194 (Roll no. 26). (consideration: CR H1456-1458; text: CR H1456-1457)
House roll call 26 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 465.
On question of consideration of the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.
POINT OF ORDER - Mr. McGovern raised a point of order againist the provisions of H.Res. 465 because it waived all points of order against H.R. 7 and the conference report to accompany H.R. 2642. The Chair announced that the disposition of the point of order would be resolved by the question of consideration of H. Res. 465. 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.
On question of consideration of the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.
POINT OF ORDER - Mr. McGovern raised a point of order against the provisions of H.Res. 465 because it violates 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. 465. 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.
By direction of the Committee on Rules, Ms. Foxx called up H.Res. 465 and asked for its immediate consideration. (consideration: CR H1443-1458)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 81.
The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 7, under a closed rule with one hour of debate on the bill. The resolution provides that an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 113-33 shall be considered as adopted. Also the rule provides for consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 2642.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 113-334, by Ms. Foxx.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 113-334, by Ms. Foxx.
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.465 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.465 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.465 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.465 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.