PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jan 20, 2011
Requires each of the following House Committees to report to the House legislation, within its jurisdiction, proposing specified changes to existing law (including the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act): (1) the Committee on Education and the Workforce; (2) the Committee on Energy and Commerce; (3) the Committee on the Judiciary; and (4) the Committee on Ways and Means.
People & committees
Rep. Dreier, David [R-CA-26] · R–CA
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, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 253 - 175 (Roll no. 16).
House roll call 16 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 253 - 175 (Roll no. 16).
House roll call 16 · Individual votesDEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 26, the House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Matheson (UT) amendment.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 9.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2 and H. Res. 9. Measure provides for consideration of H.R. 2, as amended, with the amendment printed in Part A of the report. H.R. 2, as amended, shall be debatable in the House for seven hours, equally divided and controlled. Measure provides for consideration of H. Res. 9 which shall be considered as read, debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled, and makes in order the amendment printed in Part B of the report.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 26. (consideration: CR H361-373; text of measure as reported in House: CR H361)
Rule H. Res. 26 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 26 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2 and H. Res. 9. Measure provides for consideration of H.R. 2, as amended, with the amendment printed in Part A of the report. H.R. 2, as amended, shall be debatable in the House for seven hours, equally divided and controlled. Measure provides for consideration of H. Res. 9 which shall be considered as read, debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled, and makes in order the amendment printed in Part B of the report.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 1.
Reported by the Committee on Rules. H. Rept. 112-1.
Reported by the Committee on Rules. H. Rept. 112-1.
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.9 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.9 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.9 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.9 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.