PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 8, 2005
Omnibus Nonproliferation and Anti-Nuclear Terrorism Act of 2005 - Establishes in the Executive Office of the President an Office of Nonproliferation Programs whose primary function shall be to coordinate and lead: (1) U.S. efforts to curb terrorist access to nuclear technology, materials, or expertise; and (2) U.S. nonproliferation activities, including nuclear nonproliferation activities and activities to counter other weapons of mass destruction.
Amends specified Acts to remove or modify restrictions with respect to: (1) cooperative threat reduction programs, including destruction of chemical weapons and former Soviet weapons; (2) Department of Energy nonproliferation programs; and (3) cooperative threat reduction program and international nuclear materials protection and cooperation program fund use outside the former Soviet Union.
Expresses the sense of Congress with respect to: (1) liability protections for U.S. nonproliferation efforts in Russia; (2) expansion of the proliferation security initiative; and (3) international security standards for nuclear weapons and materials.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes appropriations to the Administrator for Nuclear Security for a comprehensive inventory of Russia's stockpile of strategic and non-strategic nuclear weapons.
Authorizes Federal fund use for non-defense research and development in Russia and the states of the former Soviet Union on environmental, proliferation detection, health and medicine, or energy technologies utilizing scientists in Russia and the states of the former Soviet Union who have expertise in nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons.
Sets forth congressional findings concerning the need to strengthen the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
People & committees
Rep. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA-29] · 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 Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H568-569)
Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E187)
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 15, 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.665 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.665 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.665 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.665 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.