PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 9, 2004
Establishes in the legislative branch the Independent Commission on the 2004 Coup d'Etat in the Republic of Haiti.
Directs the Commission to examine the United States' role in the February 2004 coup d'etat in the Republic of Haiti, including: (1) the extent to which the United States impeded the democratic process in Haiti, including the extent to which U.S. actions and policies contributed to the overthrow of the democratically-elected Government of Haiti; (2) the circumstances of Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide's resignation and exile; (3) the extent to which the United States fulfilled its obligations under the Organization of American States (OAS) Inter-American Democratic Charter requiring that each OAS member country come to the aid of another OAS government under attack; (4) the extent to which the United States impeded international efforts, particularly efforts by Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries, to prevent the overthrow of the Government of Haiti; (5) the United States' role in influencing United Nations Security Council decisions regarding Haiti and in discussions between Haiti and other countries that were willing to send security forces to assist the Government of Haiti; (6) the extent to which U.S. assistance or personnel, including the Central Intelligence Agency, was used to support the opposition forces; (7) the impact of the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, and other organizations funded by the United States Agency for International Development on the political process in Haiti; (8) the impact on Haiti of the U.S. decision to discontinue bilateral assistance and U.S. efforts to block international financial assistance; and (9) the broader implications for Haiti and the Caribbean region of the events culminating in the coup d'etat.
Terminates the Commission 60 days after submission of its final report.
People & committees
Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-9] · 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 International Relations.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E335)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.3919 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.3919 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.3919 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.3919 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.