PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 25, 2003
Nicaragua Property Dispute Settlement Act of 2003 - Amends the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 to declare that specified types of actions (expropriations) taken by the Government of Nicaragua between January 1, 1956, and January 9, 2002, without a timely settlement of any claim for such an expropriation, shall not be considered in triggering a prohibition against U.S. aid to Nicaragua unless the action has been presented in writing to the Department of State on or before 120 days after a date to be specified by the Secretary of State at: (1) Department headquarters in Washington, D.C.; or (2) the U.S. Embassy to Nicaragua (in Managua).
People & committees
Rep. Ballenger, Cass [R-NC-10] · R–NC
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 Foreign Relations.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 7 (Roll no. 66). (text: CR H1915)
House roll call 66 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 7 (Roll no. 66).(text: CR H1915)
House roll call 66 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1924)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 868.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1915-1917)
Mr. Ballenger moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Committee Agreed to Seek Consideration Under Suspension of the Rules, by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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: 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.868 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.868 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.868 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.868 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.