PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jul 31, 2009
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Supports the the goals and ideals of National Save for Retirement Week, including raising public awareness of: (1) tax-preferred retirement vehicles for personal savings and retirement financial security; (2) utilizing substantial tax revenues that currently subsidize retirement savings; and (3) saving for retirement and the availability of tax-preferred employer-sponsored retirement savings vehicles.
People & committees
Rep. Schwartz, Allyson Y. [D-PA-13] · D–PA
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 without objection. (text: CR H9245)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.(text: CR H9245)
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H9245)
Committee on Ways and Means discharged.
Committee on Ways and Means discharged.
Mr. Cohen asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.662 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.662 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.662 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.662 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.