PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Nov 6, 1997
Forced Abortion Condemnation Act - Prohibits the Secretary of State from issuing any visa to, and the Attorney General from admitting to the United States, any Chinese national (including any Communist Party official or Chinese Government official) that has been found to have been involved in the enforcement of population control policies resulting in a woman being forced to undergo an abortion against her free choice, or resulting in a man or woman being forced to undergo sterilization against his or her free choice. Authorizes the President to waive such prohibition if: (1) it is in the national interest of the United States; and (2) the Congress is notified in writing.
People & committees
Rep. Fowler, Tillie [R-FL-4] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
The Clerk was authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 2570.
On motion to table the motion to reconsider Agreed to by recorded vote: 245 - 171 (Roll no. 599).
House roll call 599 · Individual votesMrs. Fowler moved to table the motion to reconsider
Ms. Lofgren moved to reconsider the vote.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 415 - 1 (Roll no. 598).
House roll call 598 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 415 - 1 (Roll no. 598).
House roll call 598 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2358, H.R. 2232, H.R. 2195, H. Res. 188 and H.R. 967. Providing for the sequential consideration in the House of the following measures: H.R. 2358, H.R. 2232, H.R. 2195, H. Res. 188, H.R. 967, H.R. 2570, H.R. 2386, H.R. 2605, H.R. 2647. One hour of general debate is provided for each measure. Specified amendments are in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 302. (consideration: CR H10139-10147)
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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.R.2570 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.2570 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.2570 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.2570 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.