Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2728) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the adjudicative flexibility with regard to an employer filing of a notice of contest following the issuance of a citation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2729) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for greater efficiency at the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2730) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for an independent review of citations issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2731) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the award of attorney's fees and costs to very small employers when they prevail in litigation prompted by the issuance of citations by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; and for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2432) to amend the Paperwork Reduction Act and titles 5 and 31, United States Code, to reform Federal paperwork and regulatory processes.

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · May 18, 2004

(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

Sets forth the rule for consideration of H.R. 2728 (filing of a notice of contest by an employer following the issuance of a citation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)), H.R. 2729 (concerning the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission), H.R. 2730 (relating to review of citations issued by OSHA), H.R. 2731 (awarding of fees and costs to very small employers when they prevail in litigation prompted by such citations), and H.R. 2432 (revising Federal paperwork and regulatory processes).

Read the summary on Congress.gov

PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Rep. Sessions, Pete [R-TX-32] · R–TX

Committees

Rules Committee

0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

May 18, 2004
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
May 18, 2004
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 219 - 195 (Roll no. 180). (text: CR H3099-3100)
House roll call 180 · Individual votes
May 18, 2004
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 219 - 195 (Roll no. 180).(text: CR H3099-3100)
House roll call 180 · Individual votes
May 18, 2004
The previous question was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H3105)
May 18, 2004
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 645.
May 18, 2004
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H3099-3106)
May 17, 2004
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 178.
May 17, 2004
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2728, H.R. 2729, H.R. 2730, H.R. 2731 and H.R. 2432.
May 17, 2004
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 108-497, by Mr. Sessions.
May 17, 2004
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 108-497, by Mr. Sessions.
May 17, 2004
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Engrossed in House · May 18, 2004 Formatted Text PDF
Reported in House · May 17, 2004 Formatted Text PDF

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.Res.645 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.645, 108th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2728) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the adjudicative flexibility with regard to an employer filing of a notice of contest following the issuance of a citation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2729) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for greater efficiency at the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2730) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for an independent review of citations issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2731) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the award of attorney's fees and costs to very small employers when they prevail in litigation prompted by the issuance of citations by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; and for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2432) to amend the Paperwork Reduction Act and titles 5 and 31, United States Code, to reform Federal paperwork and regulatory processes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-resolution/645

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2004-05-18.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/hres645/BILLS-108hres645eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T13:36:05Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze H.Res.645 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.Res.645 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.645, 108th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2728) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the adjudicative flexibility with regard to an employer filing of a notice of contest following the issuance of a citation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2729) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for greater efficiency at the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2730) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for an independent review of citations issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2731) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the award of attorney's fees and costs to very small employers when they prevail in litigation prompted by the issuance of citations by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; and for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2432) to amend the Paperwork Reduction Act and titles 5 and 31, United States Code, to reform Federal paperwork and regulatory processes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-resolution/645

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2004-05-18.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/hres645/BILLS-108hres645eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T13:36:05Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.645 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.Res.645 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.645, 108th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2728) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the adjudicative flexibility with regard to an employer filing of a notice of contest following the issuance of a citation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2729) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for greater efficiency at the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2730) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for an independent review of citations issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2731) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the award of attorney's fees and costs to very small employers when they prevail in litigation prompted by the issuance of citations by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; and for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2432) to amend the Paperwork Reduction Act and titles 5 and 31, United States Code, to reform Federal paperwork and regulatory processes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-resolution/645

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2004-05-18.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/hres645/BILLS-108hres645eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T13:36:05Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.645 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.Res.645 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.645, 108th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2728) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the adjudicative flexibility with regard to an employer filing of a notice of contest following the issuance of a citation by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2729) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for greater efficiency at the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2730) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for an independent review of citations issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2731) to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 to provide for the award of attorney's fees and costs to very small employers when they prevail in litigation prompted by the issuance of citations by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; and for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2432) to amend the Paperwork Reduction Act and titles 5 and 31, United States Code, to reform Federal paperwork and regulatory processes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-resolution/645

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2004-05-18.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/108/bills/hres645/BILLS-108hres645eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T13:36:05Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.645 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.