PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Jun 15, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on June 7, 2006. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Commemorates the 60th anniversary of the ascension to the throne of His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand.
Offers congratulations to His Majesty King Bhumibol and best wishes for continued prosperity to his Majesty and the Kingdom of Thailand.
Looks forward to enduring ties of friendship between the Thai and American people.
People & committees
Rep. Leach, James A. [R-IA-2] · R–IA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to without objection. (consideration: CR H4495; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H4495)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to without objection.(consideration: CR H4495; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H4495)
Mr. Leach asked unanimous consent that the House agree to the Senate amendment.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S5985)
Received in the Senate.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H3462-3463)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H3462-3463)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate H. Con. Res. 409.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3462-3464)
Mr. Leach moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Committee Agreed to Seek Consideration Under Suspension of the Rules, by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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: Mar 9, 2026. 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.409 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.409 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.409 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.409 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.