PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 25, 1998
Jerusalem and Berlin Embassy Relocation Act of 1998 - Expresses the sense of the Congress that the United States should proceed simultaneously with the design, construction, and occupancy of an embassy in Berlin, the capital of Germany, and in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel. Prohibits the expenditure of certain Department of State appropriations for the construction of chancery facilities in Berlin, Germany, unless construction of chancery facilities in Jerusalem, Israel, has either commenced or commences simultaneously in a manner to ensure comparable rates of construction and completion of the two facilities. Declares that no chancery facilities in Berlin, Germany, shall be occupied or used unless prior to or simultaneous with such occupancy and use, the United States has opened chancery facilities in Jerusalem, Israel.
People & committees
Rep. Sherman, Brad [D-CA-24] · 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.
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: Aug 21, 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.4181 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.4181 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.4181 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.4181 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.