PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 103-378.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 3, 1994
Authorizes the Secretary of the Navy to transfer to: (1) Argentina the tank landing ship Schenectady; (2) Chile the tank landing ships Newport and San Bernardino; (3) Malaysia the tank landing ship Spartanburg County; (4) Spain the tank landing ship Harlan County; (5) Taiwan the tank landing ships Manitowoc and Sumter; and (6) Venezuela the tank landing ships Peoria and Barbour County. Waives certain congressional notification requirements with respect to such transfers. Requires recipients to bear transfer costs. Expresses the sense of the Congress that the Secretary should request that each country receiving a vessel under this Act have any needed vessel repair or refurbishment performed at shipyards located in the United States, including U.S. Navy shipyards. Provides transfer conditions.
People & committees
Rep. Hamilton, Lee H. [D-IN-9] · D–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 103-378.
Became Public Law No: 103-378.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S14676)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S14676)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H10921)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Walker objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed until Oct. 5. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10827-10828)
Mr. Andrews (NJ) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.5155 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.5155 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.5155 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.5155 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.