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 · Dec 7, 2016
Sets forth the rule for consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 2028) making appropriations for energy and water development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, and providing for consideration of the bill (S. 612) to designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located at 1300 Victoria Street in Laredo, Texas, as the "George P. Kazen Federal Building and United States Courthouse".
People & committees
Rep. Woodall, Rob [R-GA-7] · R–GA
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: 235 - 180 (Roll no. 618). (text: CR H7403)
House roll call 618 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 235 - 180 (Roll no. 618).(text: CR H7403)
House roll call 618 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 234 - 181 (Roll no. 617). (consideration: CR H7410-7411)
House roll call 617 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 949.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H7403-7411, H7498--7526)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 164.
The rule provides for consideration of the Senate Amendment to H.R. 2028 and consideration of S. 612. S. 612 will be considered under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of general debate on both bills. The resolution also provides for a motion to recommit with or without instructions on S. 612.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 114-849, by Mr. Woodall.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 114-849, by Mr. Woodall.
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 28, 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.949 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.949 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.949 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.949 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.