PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 105-175.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 7, 1997
Recognizes the historic significance of the fiftieth anniversary of the reestablishment of the State of Israel. Commends the Israeli people for their achievements in building a new state and a pluralistic democratic society in the Middle East. Reaffirms the bonds of friendship and cooperation between the United States and Israel. Extends congratulations and best wishes to the State of Israel and her people for a peaceful, prosperous, and successful future.
People & committees
Rep. Lantos, Tom [D-CA-12] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 105-175.
Became Public Law No: 105-175.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 402 - 0 (Roll No. 112).
House roll call 112 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 402 - 0 (Roll No. 112).
House roll call 112 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2374)
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.
DEBATE - The House resumed debate.
EXTENDING TIME FOR DEBATE - Mr. Lantos asked unanimous consent that the time for debate on the joint resolution be extended for 30 minutes, equally divided. Agreed to without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2362-2371)
Mr. Gilman moved to suspend the rules and pass the resolution.
Committee Agreed to Seek Consideration Under Suspension of the Rules, by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2245)
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.
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.J.Res.102 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.J.Res.102 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.J.Res.102 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.J.Res.102 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.