PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 29, 1993
Waives provisions of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (which require adjournment by July 31 of each year) to prohibit the Senate and the House of Representatives from adjourning for a period in excess of three days, or adjourning sine die, until both Houses of Congress adopt a concurrent resolution providing either for an adjournment (in excess of three days) to a day certain, or for an adjournment sine die.
People & committees
Sen. Mitchell, George J. [D-ME] · D–ME
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 without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.
Mr. Gephardt asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and consider.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H5549)
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S9863)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S9863)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 2, 2021. 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 S.Con.Res.33 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 S.Con.Res.33 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 S.Con.Res.33 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 S.Con.Res.33 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.