PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Dec 18, 2009
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Regrets the killing of unarmed civilians and expresses deepest condolences to the families of the 57 victims who were slain in Maguindanao in the worst politically motivated violence in recent Philippine history.
Calls for: (1) an independent investigation and prosecution of those responsible; (2) an end to extrajudicial killings and election-related violence; and (3) freedom of press and safety for the investigating reporters.
Urges the Department of State, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and other U.S. government agencies to review their assistance programs to the government of the Philippines and to offer any technical assistance that Philippine authorities may request.
Reaffirms the U.S. commitment to work with Philippine authorities to combat corruption, terrorism, and security threats.
People & committees
Rep. Berman, Howard L. [D-CA-28] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S13469)
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S13469)
Received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H13568)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H13568)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Con. Res. 218.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H13568-13570)
Mr. Engel moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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: 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 H.Con.Res.218 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.218 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.218 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.218 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.