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 · Feb 24, 1995
Sets forth the modified open rule for the consideration of H.R. 1022 (Risk Assessment and Cost-Benefit Act of 1995).
People & committees
Rep. Diaz-Balart, Lincoln [R-FL-21] · R–FL
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: 253 - 165 (Roll No. 175).
House roll call 175 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 253 - 165 (Roll No. 175).
House roll call 175 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business.
ROLL CALL VOTE POSTPONED - The Chair put the question on agreeing to the resolution and by voice vote, declared that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Beilenson objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. The Chair postponed further proceedings on agreeing to the resolution until later in the day and notified the House that a vote by electronic device, if ordered, would not occur before 5 p.m. The point of order was considered as withdrawn.
The previous question was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H2234-2243, H2260-2261)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 21.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1022 with 2 hours of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is open to amendments. The bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule for a period not to exceed ten hours.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-51, by Mr. Diaz-Balart.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-51, by Mr. Diaz-Balart.
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.96 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.96 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.96 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.96 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.