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 · Sep 20, 1994
Sets forth the rule for the consideration of H.R. 2866 (California national forest lands).
People & committees
Rep. Bonior, David E. [D-MI-10] · D–MI
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: 246 - 174 (Roll no. 430).
House roll call 430 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 246 - 174 (Roll no. 430).
House roll call 430 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 245 - 175 (Roll no. 429).
House roll call 429 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H9383-9393)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 220.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2866 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Points of order against provisions of the bill for failure to comply with clause 5(a) of rule XXI shall be waived. Measure will be read by section. Specified amendments are in order. Except as provided ins sec. 2 of this resolution, no amendment shall be in order except those printed in the report accompanying this resolution, to be offered in the order and manner specified. All points of order against the amendments shall be waived. Sec. 2 makes it in order for the Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture to offer amendments en bloc consisting of amendments printed in the report or germane modifications of any such amendment. Amendments en bloc shall be debatable for 10 minutes, shall not be subject to amendment, nor subje...
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 103-732, by Mr. Bonior.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 103-732, by Mr. Bonior.
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Feb 7, 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.536 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.536 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.536 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.536 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.