PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Jul 10, 2019
This resolution sets forth the rule for consideration of H.R. 2500 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020).
Census Calendar requirements under Rule XV (Business in Order on Special Days) are inapplicable with respect to consideration of H.R. 553 (Military Surviving Spouses Equity Act).
It shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of July 11, 2019, or July 12, 2019, for the Speaker of the House to entertain motions to suspend the rules relating to H.R. 1327 (Never Forget the Heroes: Permanent Authorization of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund Act).
People & committees
Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2] · D–MA
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: 234 - 197 (Roll no. 436). (text: CR H5314-5315)
House roll call 436 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 234 - 197 (Roll no. 436).(text: CR H5314-5315)
House roll call 436 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5334-5336)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.Res. 476, the question was put on ordering the previous question on the McGovern amendment and on the resolution and by voice vote, the Chair announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Woodall demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 476.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H5314-5323)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 35.
The resolution provides for a motion to suspend the rules relating to H.R. 1327 on the legislative days of July 11, 2019, or July 12, 2019.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 116-143, by Mr. McGovern.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 116-143, by Mr. McGovern.
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.476 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.476 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.476 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.476 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.