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 · Jun 13, 2023
Special Envoy for the Abraham Accords Act
This bill establishes the position of Special Envoy for the Abraham Accords within the Department of State. (The Abraham Accords are agreements to normalize or improve relations between Israel and four members of the Arab League: the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan.)
The Special Envoy shall serve as the primary advisor to the U.S. government for expanding and strengthening the Abraham Accords. The duties of the Special Envoy include (1) encouraging counties without diplomatic relations with Israel to establish formal diplomatic, economic, security, and people-to-people ties; (2) expanding and strengthening existing relationships between Israel and Muslim-majority countries; and (3) coordinating efforts across the US government and engaging diplomatically with foreign governments, nongovernmental organizations, and other stakeholders to expand and strengthen the Abraham Accords.
The Special Envoy shall have the rank and status of ambassador.
People & committees
Rep. Lawler, Michael [R-NY-17] · R–NY
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.
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): 413 - 13 (Roll no. 251). (text: 6/12/2023 CR H2800-2801)
House roll call 251 · 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): 413 - 13 (Roll no. 251). (text: 6/12/2023 CR H2800-2801)
House roll call 251 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2834-2835)
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. 3099.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2800-2803)
Mr. McCaul moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported 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: May 27, 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.3099 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.3099 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.3099 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.3099 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.