PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Jul 25, 2006
Sets forth the rule for consideration of H.R. 5682 (United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006).
People & committees
Rep. Bishop, Rob [R-UT-1] · R–UT
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: 311 - 112 (Roll no. 406). (text: CR H5894)
House roll call 406 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 311 - 112 (Roll no. 406).(text: CR H5894)
House roll call 406 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5900-5901)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H. Res. 947, the Chair put the question on adoption of the resolution and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Bishop of Utah demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the resolution until later in the legislative day.
The previous question was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 947.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H5894-5899)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 219.
The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on International Relations now printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill for the purpose of further amendment under the five-minute rule.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 109-599, by Mr. Bishop (UT).
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 109-599, by Mr. Bishop (UT).
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.947 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.947 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.947 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.947 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.