PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Sep 6, 2000
Guam War Claims Review Commission - Establishes the Guam War Claims Review Commission to: (1) review the facts and circumstances surrounding the implementation and administration of the Guam Meritorious Claims Act and its effectiveness in addressing the war claims of American nationals residing on Guam between December 8, 1941, and July 21, 1944; (2) determine after review of documents and oral testimony whether there was parity of war claims paid to Guam residents under such Act with war claims paid to U.S. citizens or nationals who lived in or had holdings in foreign countries and other U.S. possessions occupied by the Japanese during World War II; (3) estimate the total amount necessary to compensate the Guam people for death, personal injury, forced labor, forced march, and internment; and (4) report its comments and recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior and specified congressional committees.Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Del. Underwood, Robert A. [D-GU-At Large] · D–GU
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7414-7415)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7414-7415)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 755.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7414-7416)
Mr. Walden moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 476.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-815.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-815.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H6451-6455)
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H631-632)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.755 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.755 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.755 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.755 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.