PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Rules and Administration. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 23, 2010
Amends rule XXII (Precedence of Motions) of the Standing Rules of the Senate to make out of order any dilatory motion, including dilatory quorum calls, following the filing of a cloture motion to close debate on a measure, and prior to the cloture vote, as long as the matter on which cloture has been filed remains the pending matter.
Makes it in order, on the other hand, if at any time no Senator seeks recognition on the floor, for the Majority Leader to move the question on cloture as long as any applicable filing deadline for first degree amendments has passed.
Makes it in order, also, for the Majority Leader to move the question on which cloture has been invoked on an executive nomination or a motion to proceed if, at any time after cloture is invoked, no Senator seeks recognition on the floor.
People & committees
Sen. Lautenberg, Frank R. [D-NJ] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Rules and Administration. Hearings held.
Referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1876)
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: Jan 14, 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.465 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.465 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.465 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.465 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.