PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 1046, H. Res. 654 is laid on the table.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Jan 31, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Waives a specified requirement of rule XIII to provide for consideration or disposition of a bill to extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism.
People & committees
Rep. Capito, Shelley Moore [R-WV-2] · R–WV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 1046, H. Res. 654 is laid on the table.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 143.
The requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived with respect to any resolution reported on the legislative day of February 1, 2006, providing for consideration or dispostion of a bill to extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism, and for other purposes.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 109-367, by Mrs. Capito.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 109-367, by Mrs. Capito.
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.654 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.654 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.654 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.654 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.