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 · Aug 3, 2007
Directs the Officers of the House of Representatives to preserve immediately all records, documents, recordings, electronic transmissions, or other material, regardless of form, related to the voting irregularities of August 2, 2007.
Establishes a select committee to: (1) investigate the circumstances surrounding the record vote requested on the motion to recommit to H.R. 3161, including the Chair's ruling over the Parliamentarian's objections; (2) report to the House regarding the actions of any Members, officers, or employees of the House engaged in the disenfranchisement of Members in voting on the question of the requested record vote; and (3) recommend changes to House rules and procedures necessary to protect the voting rights of constitutionally elected Members chosen by the people of the United States of America.
People & committees
Rep. Boehner, John A. [R-OH-8] · 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 voice vote. (text: CR H9682-9683)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9682-9683)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 611.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H9682-9685)
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.611 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.611 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.611 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.611 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.