PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.WITHDRAWAL OF PRIVILEGED RESOLUTION - Mr. Hoyer asked unanimous consent that the privileged resolution be withdrawn. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 3, 2007
Requires the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to review immediately the regularity of events surrounding the vote on the motion to recommit on H.R. 3161 (Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008), which occurred on August 2, 2007, and report back to the House of Representatives.
People & committees
Rep. Hoyer, Steny H. [D-MD-5] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
WITHDRAWAL OF PRIVILEGED RESOLUTION - Mr. Hoyer asked unanimous consent that the privileged resolution be withdrawn. Agreed to without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 609.
Considered as privileged matter.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.609 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.609 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.609 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.609 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.