PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 9, 2014
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on July 31, 2014. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Condemns and disapproves of the Obama administration's failure to comply with the lawful 30-day statutory reporting requirement in executing the transfer of five senior Taliban members from detention at U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Expresses concern over: (1) national security implications that may arise from the Taliban members' release, including the national security threat to the American people and the U.S. Armed Forces; and (2) the repercussions of negotiating with terrorists, and the risk that such negotiations may further encourage hostilities and the abduction of Americans.
Stipulates that further violations of appropriate law are unacceptable.
States that these actions have burdened the trust in the commitment and ability of the Obama administration to work with Congress.
Expresses relief that Sergeant Bergdahl has returned safely to the United States.
People & committees
Rep. Rigell, E. Scott [R-VA-2] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 249 - 163 (Roll no. 485). (text: CR H7325)
House roll call 485 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 249 - 163 (Roll no. 485).(text: CR H7325)
House roll call 485 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H7334-7335)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 644.
Resolution provides for one hour of debate on H.R. 5078 and specified amendments are in order. A motion to recommit with or without instructions is also in order. Resolution provides for one hour of debate on H. Res. 644 and allows a motion to recommit, with or without instructions.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 715. (consideration: CR H7325-7335)
Rule H. Res. 715 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 715 Reported to House. Resolution provides for one hour of debate on H.R. 5078 and specified amendments are in order. A motion to recommit with or without instructions is also in order. Resolution provides for one hour of debate on H. Res. 644 and allows a motion to recommit, with or without instructions.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 133.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Armed Services. H. Rept. 113-569.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Armed Services. H. Rept. 113-569.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jun 6, 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.644 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.644 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.644 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.644 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.