PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 182 (Roll no. 1048). (text: CR H12802)
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Nov 6, 2007
Waives points of order against consideration of the conference report on H.R. 3043 (Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008).
Makes a motion to proceed to consideration of H.R. 3688 (United States-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act) in order only if offered by the Majority Leader or his designee.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Alcee L. [D-FL-23] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 182 (Roll no. 1048). (text: CR H12802)
House roll call 1048 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 182 (Roll no. 1048).(text: CR H12802)
House roll call 1048 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 218 - 183 (Roll no. 1047). (consideration: CR H12812-12813)
House roll call 1047 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 794.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H12802-12805, H12806-12814)
Will the House now consider the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 203 - 178 (Roll no. 1044).
House roll call 1044 · Individual votesPOINT OF ORDER - Mr. Flake raised a point of order against the provisions of H. Res. 794 because it waived all points of order against the conference report to accompany H.R. 3043. The Chair announced that the disposition of the point of order would be resolved by the question of consideration of H. Res. 794. The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the point of order at the end of which the Chair will put the question on consideration.
By direction of the Committee on Rules, Mr. Hastings (FL) called up H. Res. 794 and asked for its immediate consideration.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 146.
Rule provides for consideration of the conference report to H.R. 3043.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 110-427, by Mr. Hastings (FL).
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 110-427, by Mr. Hastings (FL).
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.794 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.794 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.794 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.794 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.