Remembering the victims of the genocide that occurred in 1994 in Rwanda and pledging to work to ensure that such an atrocity does not take place again.
Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 2, 2004
States that Congress: (1) remembers the victims of the 1994 Rwanda genocide and pledges to work to ensure that such an atrocity does not take place again; (2) acknowledges that the international community, including the United States, failed the people of Rwanda and watched with indifference while hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians were being killed; (3) supports assistance to the survivors of the Rwandan genocide; (4) urges political and financial support for the Gacaca courts; (5) acknowledges the heroic work of many individuals and human rights organizations for their campaign to help stop the genocide; (6) expresses deep appreciation to General Romeo Dallaire for his efforts to stop the genocide and for helping many Rwandese civilians; (7) accepts the fact that General Dallaire warned the United Nations on a number of occasions of an impending genocide and was ordered by his superiors not to take action; (8) calls for an investigation of the role played by the United States prior to and during the Rwandan genocide, noting that the parliaments of Belgium and France both created commissions of inquiry to investigate the roles played by their respective governments; and (9) urges the creation of a bi-partisan Commission of Inquiry for Rwanda to investigate all aspects of the role played by the United States prior to and during the Rwandan genocide.
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
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.Con.Res.406 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.Con.Res.406 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.Con.Res.406 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.Con.Res.406 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.