PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Mar 16, 2015
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Authorizes the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center on April 15, 2015, for a ceremony to present the Congressional Gold Medal to the World War II members of the Doolittle Tokyo Raiders.
People & committees
Sen. Brown, Sherrod [D-OH] · D–OH
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. (text: CR H1651-1652)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.(text: CR H1651-1652)
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H1651-1652)
Mrs. Miller (MI) asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and consider.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S1509)
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S1509)
Referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1255)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.Con.Res.7 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.7 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.7 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.7 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.