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 · Jul 16, 2009
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1018) to amend the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act to improve the management and long-term health of wild free-roaming horses and burros.
People & committees
Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-3] · D–MA
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: 236 - 186 (Roll no. 575). (text: CR H8306-8307)
House roll call 575 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 236 - 186 (Roll no. 575).(text: CR H8306-8307)
House roll call 575 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 232 - 188 (Roll no. 574). (consideration: CR H8312-8313, H8315-8316; text: CR H8312-8313)
House roll call 574 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8315-8316)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.Res. 653, the Chair put the question on ordering the previous question and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mrs. Foxx demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings on ordering the previous question until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 653.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H8306-8313)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 91.
The resolution waives all points of order against consideration of the bill except for clauses 9 and 10 of rule XXI. The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Natural Resources shall be considered as adopted. The resolution waives all points of order against provisions of the bill, as amended. This waiver does not affect the point of order available under clause 9 of rule XXI. The amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules, if offered by Representative Rahall or his designee, shall be considered as read and separately debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent and shall not be subject to a demand for the division of the question. The amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules, if offered by Representative Hastings (WA) or his designee shall be considered as read and separately debatable for 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 111-212, by Mr. McGovern.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 111-212, by Mr. McGovern.
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.653 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.653 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.653 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.653 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.