PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 2, 2006
Amends the Rules of the House of Representatives to establish a new rule XXIX to prohibit any vote by the House on any bill, joint resolution, conference report, or amendment unless: (1) the text of the measure has been available to all Members and their staffs in both printed and electronic format for at least 10 days; and (2) any amendment that makes substantive changes has been made available for at least 72 hours. Makes exceptions for: (1) legislation containing classified information if Members have at least seven days to study the contents; and (2) congressional declarations of war or authorization of military force to respond to attacks on the United States.
Deems any Member who votes for a measure in violation of such rule to have violated House ethics rules and to be subject to censure. Allows any citizen who is eligible to vote and who is not an executive or judicial branch employee to petition the Committee on Standards and Official Conduct to investigate allegations of violations of such rule.
Prohibits the Rules Committee from waiving such rule.
People & committees
Rep. Paul, Ron [R-TX-14] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E261)
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: 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.709 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.709 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.709 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.709 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.