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 · Jan 24, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends Rule III (The Members, Delegates, and Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico) of the Rules of the House of Representatives to provide that, in a Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, each Delegate and the Resident Commissioner shall possess the same powers and privileges (including voting) as Members of the House.
Amends Rule XVIII (The Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union) to allow a Delegate or the Resident Commissioner to preside as Chairman of such Committee.
Declares that, whenever a recorded vote on any question has been decided by a margin within which the votes cast by the Delegates and the Resident Commissioner have been decisive, the Committee of the Whole shall rise and the Speaker shall put such question de novo without intervening motion. Requires the Committee to resume its sitting, without intervening motion, upon the announcement of the vote on that question.
People & committees
Rep. Hoyer, Steny H. [D-MD-5] · D–MD
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 the Yeas and Nays: 226 - 191 (Roll no. 57). (text: CR H904)
House roll call 57 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 226 - 191 (Roll no. 57).(text: CR H904)
House roll call 57 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H912)
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 86, the House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.Res. 78.
Rule provides for consideration of H. Res. 78 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 86. (consideration: CR H903-913)
On motion to consider the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 224 - 186 (Roll no. 56). (consideration: CR H902-903)
House roll call 56 · Individual votesMr. McHenry demanded that the Chair put the question on consideration of the measure.
Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 86, Mr. Hastings (FL) called up H.Res. 78 for consideration.
Rule H. Res. 86 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 86 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H. Res. 78 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order.
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
Introduced in House
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.78 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.78 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.78 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.78 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.