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 · Sep 25, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Sets forth a rule for the consideration of H.R. 976 (Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007).
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 recorded vote: 215 - 199, 2 Present (Roll no. 904). (text: CR H10803)
House roll call 904 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 215 - 199, 2 Present (Roll no. 904).(text: CR H10803)
House roll call 904 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 218 - 197 (Roll no. 903). (consideration: CR H10814-10815)
House roll call 903 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 675.
On motion to table the motion to appeal the ruling of the chair Agreed to by recorded vote: 224 - 190 (Roll no. 902).
House roll call 902 · Individual votesMr. McGovern moved to table the motion to appeal the ruling of the chair (consideration: CR H10804)
Mr. Rogers (MI) appealed the ruling of the chair. The question was then put on sustaining the ruling of the chair.
Point of order raised by Mr. Rogers (MI) on the content of the measure. Mr. Rogers (MI) stated that the provisions of H. Res. 675 violate House earmark rules. Point of order overruled by the Chair.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H10803-10815)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 121.
Providing for the consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 976.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 110-346, by Mr. McGovern.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 110-346, 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.675 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.675 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.675 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.675 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.