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 · May 7, 2014
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives, with respect to the targeting by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of conservative nonprofit advocacy groups, that: (1) the statements and actions of the IRS, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Obama Administration have served to undermine DOJ's investigation of this matter; (2) the Administration's efforts to undermine the investigation, and the appointment of a person who has donated almost $7,000 to President Obama and the Democratic National Committee in a lead investigative role, have created a conflict of interest for DOJ that warrants removal of the investigation from its normal processes; (3) further investigation of the matter is warranted due to the apparent criminal activity by Lois G. Lerner, former IRS Director, Exempt Organizations, and the ongoing disclosure of internal communications showing potentially unlawful conduct by executive branch personnel; (4) given DOJ's conflict of interest, as well as the strong public interest in ensuring that public officials who inappropriately targeted American citizens for exercising their right to free expression are held accountable, appointment of a special counsel would be in the public interest; and (5) Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr., should appoint a special counsel, without further delay, to investigate the targeting of conservative nonprofit advocacy groups by the IRS.
People & committees
Rep. Jordan, Jim [R-OH-4] · R–OH
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: 250 - 168 (Roll no. 204). (text: CR H3909-3910)
House roll call 204 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 250 - 168 (Roll no. 204).(text: CR H3909-3910)
House roll call 204 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3922-3923)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.Res. 565, the Chair put the question on adoption of the resolution and by voice vote, announced that the ayes prevailed. Ms. Jackson Lee (TX) demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the resolution until later in the legislative day.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H3919)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 565.
Rule provides for consideration of H. Res. 565 with 40 minutes of general debate. H. Res. 568 also provides for consideration of House Report 113-415 and an accompanying resolution under a closed rule. If such a resolution is considered, the rule provides for 50 minutes of debate on said resolution followed by one motion to refer, if offered by Representative Cummings or his designee and is debatable for 10 minutes.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 568. (consideration: CR H3909-3919)
Rule H. Res. 568 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 568 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H. Res. 565 with 40 minutes of general debate. H. Res. 568 also provides for consideration of House Report 113-415 and an accompanying resolution under a closed rule. If such a resolution is considered, the rule provides for 50 minutes of debate on said resolution followed by one motion to refer, if offered by Representative Cummings or his designee and is debatable for 10 minutes.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
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.565 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.565 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.565 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.565 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.