PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 28, 2003
Calls on: (1) the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) in a sign of good faith to allow International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors to return to North Korea, reinstall surveillance cameras, and reseal the country's plutonium reprocessing plant while a more comprehensive and mutually acceptable agreement can be negotiated with the United States; (2) the United States in a sign of good faith to resume monthly fuel oil shipments to North Korea while such agreement is worked out; (3) both countries to begin diplomatic talks and negotiations until a mutually acceptable binding treaty to resolve the current crisis has been agreed to by both parties; and (4) members of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), and the Russian Federation, the Republic of Korea, Australia, Canada, and other concerned nations to support all diplomatic attempts by the United States and North Korea to achieve a peaceful resolution to the current crisis.Commends the IAEA for its efforts and calls on it to continue its negotiations with North Korea to allow its inspectors to return to the country.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Alcee L. [D-FL-23] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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 2, 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.18 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.18 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.18 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.18 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.