PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to table the measure Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 259 - 161 (Roll no. 443). (consideration: CR H4615)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 29, 2012
Disapproves of the behavior of the chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform for: (1) interfering with ongoing criminal investigations; (2) insisting on a personal attack against the Attorney General; and (3) calling him a liar on national television without corroborating evidence, thereby bringing discredit to the integrity of the House.
People & committees
Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to table the measure Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 259 - 161 (Roll no. 443). (consideration: CR H4615)
House roll call 443 · Individual votesMr. Webster moved to table the measure.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H4614-4615; text of measure as introduced: CR H4614-4615)
A QUESTION OF THE PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE - Ms. Jackson Lee rose to a question of the privileges of the House and submitted a privileged resolution. Upon examination of the resolution, the Chair determined that the resolution qualified.
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: Feb 23, 2019. 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.718 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.718 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.718 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.718 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.