PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 54-44. Record Vote No: 154. (consideration: CR S7173-7196)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 16, 1994
Requires the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs in the Senate to conduct hearings into and make a public report to the Senate on whether improper conduct occurred regarding: (1) communications between officials of the White House and the Department of the Treasury or the Resolution Trust Corporation relating to the Whitewater Development Corporation and the Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan Association; (2) the Park Service Police investigation into the death of White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster; and (3) the way in which White House officials handled documents in his White House office at the time of his death. Requires the Committee to coordinate its activities with the independent counsel's investigation. Increases the amount authorized for expenditures by the Committee for March 1, 1994, through February 28, 1995.
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.
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 54-44. Record Vote No: 154. (consideration: CR S7173-7196)
Senate roll call 154 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 54-44. Record Vote No: 154.(consideration: CR S7173-7196)
Senate roll call 154 · Individual votesMeasure laid before Senate by unanimous consent.
Submitted in the Senate. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 475.
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: 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.Res.229 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.Res.229 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.Res.229 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.Res.229 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.