PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 112-192.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 5, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House passed version is repeated here.) Authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury, upon a determination by the President that it is in the U.S. national interest to support assistance for Burma, to instruct the U.S. Executive Director at any international financial institution to vote in favor of assistance for Burma. Directs the President to provide Congress with written notice of any such determination.
Requires that prior to the President making such determination the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury shall consult with Congress regarding assistance for Burma by an international financial institution, and the national interests served by such assistance.
Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to instruct the U.S. Executive Director at each international financial institution to not vote in favor of assistance to Burma until at least 15 days have elapsed from the date on which the President has provided Congress with the required notice.
People & committees
Rep. Royce, Edward R. [R-CA-40] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-192.
Became Public Law No: 112-192.
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 Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR 9/21/2012 S6670-6671)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR 9/21/2012 S6670-6671)
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. (text: CR H6124)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6124)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6431.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6124-6125)
Mr. Royce moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
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: 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.6431 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.6431 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.6431 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.6431 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.