PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Mar 25, 2019
European Energy Security and Diversification Act of 2019
This bill directs the Department of State to prioritize assistance to develop energy infrastructure in Europe and Eurasia, in particular for projects involving the European Commission and countries in the region. Assistance shall include political and diplomatic support and funding assistance.
Projects eligible for such assistance include infrastructure for natural gas, electricity transmission, and renewable energy. The State Department shall give preference to projects that (1) improve the capacity to transfer gas and electricity within and between regional countries, (2) have been identified by the European Commission as integral for regional energy security, (3) are expected to enhance energy market integration and transparency, (4) can attract other sources of funding, and (5) can potentially use U.S. goods and services.
The President shall report to Congress annually about U.S. assistance provided under this bill.
People & committees
Rep. Kinzinger, Adam [R-IL-16] · R–IL
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 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 391 - 24 (Roll no. 126). (text: CR H2771-2772)
House roll call 126 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 391 - 24 (Roll no. 126).(text: CR H2771-2772)
House roll call 126 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2780-2781)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1616.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2771-2773)
Mr. Sires moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Committee Agreed to Seek Consideration Under Suspension of the Rules.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.R.1616 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.R.1616 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.R.1616 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.R.1616 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.