PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 8, 2007
Expresses the sense of Congress that the United Nations should: (1) ensure that the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) enforces its rules regarding financing, staffing, accounting, and auditing of its activities in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea); (2) authorize an external investigation of all UNDP activities in North Korea; and (3) ensure that any UNDP local staff in North Korea who committed crimes are prosecuted or who violated regulations are sanctioned.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the President should use U.S. influence to ensure that UNDP: (1) ceases activities in North Korea that are in violation of UNDP regulations; (2) conducts a full audit of UNDP activities in North Korea since 1998; and (3) establishes regulations to ensure that no funds allocated to UNDP activities in North Korea are provided to the government of North Korea. Directs the Secretary of State to withhold U.S. contributions to the general funds of UNDP until the Secretary certifies to Congress that UNDP meets such provisions.
People & committees
Rep. Garrett, Scott [R-NJ-5] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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: Jan 2, 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.937 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.937 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.937 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.937 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.