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 · Jun 22, 2004
Modifies the conference report on S.Con.Res. 95 (congressional budget) and the accompanying joint explanatory statement, as made applicable to the House of Representatives by H.Res. 649 (providing for the consideration of the conference report), with respect to: (1) recommended levels and amounts; (2) major functional categories; (3) allocations made to the House Committee on Appropriations; and (4) additional reconciliation instructions to the House Committee on Ways and Means to change tax laws to increase revenues by a specified amount through reduction or offsetting of tax reductions received during tax year 2005 by taxpayers filing joint returns with adjusted gross income above $1 million and comparable amounts for taxpayers with other filing statuses.
Provides that such modifications shall have force and effect in the House as though they were included in the conference report and accompanying statement.
People & committees
Rep. Obey, David R. [D-WI-7] · D–WI
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 Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 184 - 230 (Roll No. 301). (text: CR H4908-4909)
House roll call 301 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 184 - 230 (Roll No. 301).(text: CR H4908-4909)
House roll call 301 · Individual votesDEBATE - Pursuant to a previous order of the House on Tuesday, June 22, 2004, the House proceeded with ninety minutes of debate on H. Res. 685.
Considered pursuant to a previous order. (consideration: CR H4908)
Consideration initiated pursuant to a previous order.
Referred to the Committee on Rules, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Rules, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Rules, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.685 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.685 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.685 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.685 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.