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 8, 2016
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5325) making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2017.
People & committees
Rep. Woodall, Rob [R-GA-7] · R–GA
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: 237 - 182 (Roll no. 286). (text: CR H3586-3587)
House roll call 286 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 237 - 182 (Roll no. 286).(text: CR H3586-3587)
House roll call 286 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 241 - 181 (Roll no. 285). (consideration: CR H3599)
House roll call 285 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3598-3600)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H. Res. 771, the Chair put the question on ordering the previous question and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Hastings demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings on ordering the previous question until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 771.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H3586-3596)
On motion to consider the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 231 - 170 (Roll no. 283).
House roll call 283 · Individual votesOn question of consideration of the resolution
POINT OF ORDER - Prior to consideration of the measure, Mr. Castro (TX) raised a point of order against consideration of H. Res. 771 and the Chair recognized Mr. Castro and Mr. Woodall for up to 10 minutes each on the point of order. After debate, the Chair will put the question of consideration on the resolution as the statutory means of disposing of the point of order in the following form: "Will the House now consider the resolution?".
The Chair recognized Mr. Woodall for the purpose of calling up a resolution.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 123.
The resolution makes in order only those further amendments printed in the report. Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member desingated in the report, shall be considered as read, be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or Committee of the Whole. Secion 2 provides that during consideration of H.R. 5325, section 3304 of Senate Concurrent Resolution 11 shall not apply.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 114-611, by Mr. Woodall.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 114-611, by Mr. Woodall.
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.771 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.771 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.771 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.771 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.