PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 6, 2009
International Uranium Extraction and Milling Control Act of 2009 - States that it shall be U.S. policy to: (1) oppose the transfer to Iran, North Korea, and Syria of goods, services, or technology relevant to their capability to extract or mill uranium ore; and (2) work with like-minded countries to impose international restrictions on such transfers.
Amends the Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act to include in the President's proliferation report to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations identification of every foreign person who on or after January 1, 2009, transferred to Iran, Syria, or North Korea goods, services, or technology that could assist efforts to extract or mill uranium ore within the territory or control of Iran, North Korea, or Syria.
People & committees
Rep. Sherman, Brad [D-CA-27] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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: Aug 14, 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.2290 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.2290 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.2290 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.2290 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.