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 · Jan 27, 2009
Sets forth the rule for consideration of H.R. 1 (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009).
Requires the chair of the Committee on Appropriations to insert in the Congressional Record by February 4, 2009, such material as he may deem explanatory of appropriations measures for FY2009.
Authorizes the chair of the Committee on Ways and Means to file, on behalf of the Committee, a supplemental report to accompany H.R. 598 (providing for a portion of the economic recovery package relating to revenue measures, unemployment, and health).
People & committees
Rep. Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [D-NY-28] · D–NY
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: 243 - 185 (Roll no. 40). (text: CR H607)
House roll call 40 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 243 - 185 (Roll no. 40).(text: CR H607)
House roll call 40 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H618)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 92.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H607-618)
On question of consideration of the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 240 - 174 (Roll no. 39).
House roll call 39 · Individual votesPOINT OF ORDER - Mr. Stearns raised a point of order against the provisions of H.Res. 92 because it violates the Congressional Budget Act. The Chair announced that the disposition of the point of order would be resolved by the question of consideration of H.Res. 92. The House proceeded with 20 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, Ms. Slaughter called up H.Res. 92 and asked for its immediate consideration.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 6.
Resolution provides for further consideration of H.R. 1. Further general debate shall continue for not to exceed one hour, equally divided and controlled and shall be limited to the bill and amendments made in order by this resolution. Upon the adoption of this resolution, the amendment printed in Part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 111-9, by Ms. Slaughter.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 111-9, by Ms. Slaughter.
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.92 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.92 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.92 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.92 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.