PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 16, 2005
Expresses the sense of Congress that the Government of the Republic of Belarus should: (1) cease its violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including persecution of political opponents and independent journalists; (2) release political opponents, including Mikhail Marynich, Valery Levonevskiy, and Aleksandr Vasilev; and (3) investigate the disappearance of Victor Gonchar, Anatoly Krasovsky, Yuri Zakharenka, and Dmitry Zavadsky.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the U.S. Government should continue to insist that Belarus respect its citizens' fundamental human rights, and should pursue such insistence at international fora, including the United Nations (UN) and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Relations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Europe and Emerging Threats.
Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
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 23, 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.Con.Res.102 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.Con.Res.102 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.Con.Res.102 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.Con.Res.102 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.