PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 5, 1998
Commends efforts of the international contact group (the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, and Italy) in support of a resolution of the conflict in Kosova. Opposes termination of international or U.S. sanctions against the Government of Serbia and Montenegro, unless such termination serves to support a peaceful resolution to the repression in Kosova. Urges the United States to: (1) consult with its allies and other members of the United Nations on reimposing sanctions against Serbia-Montenegro Montenegro that were terminated following the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement in 1995 if Serbian authorities continue to use unlawful violence against the Albanian people of Kosova; (2) acknowledge recent developments in Montenegro that indicate that the new leadership of that Republic is seeking a peaceful resolution to the repression in Kosova; and (3) recognize positive actions by the Montenegro Government regarding repression in Kosova through exclusion from sanctions that may be applied to the Serbian Government. Urges that: (1) the elections in Kosova scheduled on March 22, 1998, be allowed to proceed unimpeded by Belgrade; (2) all parties refrain from acts that could lead to heightened tensions in Kosova; (3) the agreement on education in Kosova be implemented immediately; and (4) the elected leaders of Kosova begin a dialog with the authorities in Belgrade to resolve the present situation and to provide for the exercise of the legitimate civil and political rights of the Albanian people of Kosova.
People & committees
Rep. Gilman, Benjamin A. [R-NY-20] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 406 - 1, 1 Present (Roll No. 57).
House roll call 57 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 406 - 1, 1 Present (Roll No. 57).
House roll call 57 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business.
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed until March 18.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules.
Mr. Gilman moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Committee Agreed to Seek Consideration Under Suspension of the Rules, (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E318)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.235 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.235 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.235 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.235 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.