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 · Jul 13, 2016
Resolves that John Andrew Koskinen, Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that specified articles of impeachment be exhibited to the Senate.
Sets forth articles of impeachment specifying that John Andrew Koskinen, in his conduct while Commissioner of the IRS:
engaged in a pattern of conduct that is incompatible with his duties as an officer of the United States by failing to respond to lawfully issued congressional subpoenas,
engaged in a pattern of deception that demonstrates his unfitness to serve by making a series of false and misleading statements to Congress in contravention of his oath to tell the truth,
acted in a manner inconsistent with the trust and confidence placed in him as an officer of the United States, and
failed to act with competence and forthrightness in overseeing the investigation into IRS targeting of Americans because of their political affiliations.
People & committees
Rep. Fleming, John [R-LA-4] · R–LA
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 motion to refer Agreed to by recorded vote: 342 - 72 (Roll No. 608). (consideration: CR H7254)
House roll call 608 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to refer was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H7254)
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on the Goodlatte motion to refer H. Res. 828 to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. Goodlatte moved to refer to the Judiciary. (consideration: CR H7254)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to table the measure Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 180 - 235 (Roll no. 607). (consideration: CR H7253)
House roll call 607 · Individual votesMs. Pelosi moved to table the measure. (consideration: CR H7253)
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H7252-7254; text of measure as introduced: CR H7252-7253)
QUESTION OF THE PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE - Mr. Jordan rose to a question of the privileges of the House and submitted a privileged resolution. The Clerk reported the text of the resolution and the Chair determined that the resolution did constitute a question of the privileges of the House.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 3, 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.828 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.828 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.828 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.828 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.