PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 8, 2001
Declares that the House of Representations condemns and deplores: (1) the continued detention of Li Shaomin, Gao Zhan, Wu Jianmin, Tan Guangguang, Teng Chunyan, and other scholars detained on false charges by the Government of the People's Republic of China and calls for their immediate and unconditional release; (2) the lack of due process afforded to these detainees and the probable coercion of confessions from some of them; and (3) the ongoing and systematic pattern of human rights violations by the Chinese Government.Urges the Chinese Government to consider: (1) the implications to the broader U.S.-Chinese relationship of detaining and coercing confessions from U.S. citizens and permanent residents on unsubstantiated spying charges or suspicions; and (2) releasing Liu Yaping on humanitarian grounds.Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that the President should: (1) make the release of the scholars a top priority of U.S. foreign policy with the Chinese Government; (2) make every effort to assist the scholars and their families while discussions of their release continue; (3) make it clear that the detention of U.S. citizens and permanent residents on unsubstantiated spying charges or suspicions of spying and the infliction of human rights violations upon U.S. citizens and residents, is not in the interests of the Chinese Government; and (4) send a special, high ranking representative to reiterate the deep concern of the United States regarding the continued imprisonment of the scholars and to discuss their legal status and immediate humanitarian needs.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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 agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 379 - 0 (Roll no. 186). (text: CR H3482)
House roll call 186 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 379 - 0 (Roll no. 186).(text: CR H3482)
House roll call 186 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3491-3492)
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. Res. 160.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3481-3487)
Mr. Smith (NJ) moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
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.Res.160 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.160 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.160 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.160 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.