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 21, 2009
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2920) to reinstitute and update the Pay-As-You-Go requirement of budget neutrality on new tax and mandatory spending legislation, enforced by the threat of annual, automatic sequestration.
People & committees
Rep. Arcuri, Michael A. [D-NY-24] · D–NY
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: 243 - 182 (Roll no. 606). (text: CR H8501-8502)
House roll call 606 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 243 - 182 (Roll no. 606).(text: CR H8501-8502)
House roll call 606 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8510)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.Res. 665, the Chair put the question on adoption of the resolution and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Dreier demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the resolution until a time to be announced.
The previous question was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H8509)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 665.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H8501-8509)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 93.
All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The resolution provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part A of the report, as modified by the amendment printed in part B of this report shall be considered as adopted and the bill, as amended shall be considered as read. The resolution waives all points of order against the bill, as amended. The amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules, if offered by Rep. Ryan (WI) or his designee, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of order except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI, shall be considered as read, and shall be separately debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent For purposes of the concurrent resolution on the budget, the amounts specified in section 421(a)(2)(A) and section 421(a)(2)(C) shall be considered to be those reflected in section 314 and section 316, respectively, of the House companion measure.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 111-217, by Mr. Arcuri.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 111-217, by Mr. Arcuri.
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.665 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.665 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.665 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.665 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.