PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Mar 24, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Declares the sense of the House of Representatives that there is a critical need to increase awareness and education about heart disease and the risk factors for heart disease among women.
Commends First Lady Laura Bush and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute in their vital campaign to raise public awareness that heart disease is the number one killer of American women.
Recognizes that the more women become cognizant of the scourge of heart disease and how to prevent it, the more likely they can make sound lifestyle changes to help reduce their chances of getting heart disease.
People & committees
Rep. Snyder, Vic [D-AR-2] · D–AR
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 motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 420 - 0 (Roll no. 77). (text: CR 3/23/2004 H1339)
House roll call 77 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 420 - 0 (Roll no. 77).(text: CR 3/23/2004 H1339)
House roll call 77 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1393-1394)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 522.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1339-1341)
Mr. Rogers (MI) moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 156.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 108-440.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 108-440.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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: 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.522 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.522 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.522 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.522 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.