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 · Nov 17, 2005
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4241) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 201(a) of the concurrent resolution on the budget for FY2006.
People & committees
Rep. Putnam, Adam H. [R-FL-12] · R–FL
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 voice vote. (text: CR H10531)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H10531)
The previous question was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H10544)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 560.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H10531-10534, H10537-10545)
On motion to consider Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 224 - 198 (Roll No. 600).
House roll call 600 · Individual votesAt the conclusion of debate on the point of order the Chair put the question on consideration of H.Res. 560 and announced by voice vote the ayes had prevailed. Mr. McDermott objected to the voice vote and demanded the Yeas and Nays.
DEBATE - The Chair announced that, under section 426 (b) (4) of the Budget Act, the proponent and an opponent of the point of order will each be recognized for 10 minutes on the question of consideration.
POINT OF ORDER AGAINST CONSIDERATION - Mr. McDermott made a point of order that the provisions of H. Res. 560 violated section 426 (a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. In accordance with section 426 (a) of the Act, the Chair announced that the threshold burden to identify the specific language in the resolution on which the point of order was predicated had been met.
Mr. Putnam moved to consider H. Res. 560. (consideration: CR H10533-10534, H10537)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 122.
Sec. 2. During consideration of H.R. 4241 pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the bill to a time designated by the Speaker. Sec. 3. After passage of H.R. 4241, it shall be in order to take from the Speaker's table S. 1932 and to consider the Senate bill in the House. All points of order against the Senate bill and against its consideration are waived. It shall be in order to move to strike all after the enacting clause of the Senate bill and to insert in lieu thereof the provisions of H.R. 4241 as passed by the House. All points of order against that motion are waived.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 109-303, by Mr. Putnam.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 109-303, by Mr. Putnam.
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.560 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.560 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.560 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.560 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.