PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Dec 9, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Notes with sorrow the one-year anniversary of the November 9, 2005, terrorist attacks in Amman, Jordan, and condemns such attacks in the strongest terms.
Expresses ongoing condolences to the families and friends of those who were killed in the attacks and sympathies to those who were injured.
Reiterates support for the Jordanian people and its government.
Values the strong U.S.-Jordan friendship.
Expresses readiness to assist the Jordanian authorities in their efforts to pursue and dismantle the networks that carry out such terrorist attacks.
People & committees
Rep. Boozman, John [R-AR-3] · R–AR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection. (text: CR 12/8/2006 H9302)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.(text: CR 12/8/2006 H9302)
Mr. Pence asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR 12/8/2006 H9302)
Committee on International Relations discharged.
Committee on International Relations discharged.
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.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.Res.1095 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.Res.1095 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.Res.1095 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.Res.1095 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.