PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 3, 2009
Expresses the heartfelt condolences of the House of Representatives to the families and friends of the victims of the May 11, 2009, shooting at the combat stress clinic at Camp Liberty, Iraq.
Conveys its ongoing deep gratitude to the brave members of the Armed Forces who risk their lives in service of protecting the nation.
Recognizes the important work of the medical professionals and staff members, who provide essential mental health services to our servicemen and women, at Combat Stress Control Center in Camp Liberty, Iraq, and other clinics in theater and at home.
Commits the House to: (1) focus on the mental, in addition to the physical, well-being of the nation's military servicemen and women, and veterans; and (2) support the policies, resources, and funding necessary to combat successfully the mental and physical healthcare challenges that they may confront.
People & committees
Rep. Kratovil, Frank, Jr. [D-MD-1] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 299). (text: CR 6/2/2009 H6038)
House roll call 299 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 299).(text: CR 6/2/2009 H6038)
House roll call 299 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6123-6124)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Kratovil objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 471.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6038-6040)
Mr. Kratovil moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
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: Jun 6, 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.471 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.471 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.471 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.471 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.