PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 16, 2010
Mourns the loss of life, as well as the physical damage, caused by the flooding in Pakistan and expresses condolences to the flood victims' families.
Recognizes that: (1) Pakistan is a close U.S. ally and friend; and (2) an effective and accountable government in Pakistan is essential for the country's long-term recovery and stability.
Supports the use of funds authorized by the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009 to provide long-term recovery and rehabilitation for flood-affected areas and populations and urges a reexamination of priorities for spending such funds with a view toward ensuring that the needs of the Pakistani people are appropriately addressed in the aftermath of the disaster.
Commends the relief and recovery actions by the U.S. military, the Department of State, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Pakistani-American and U.S. business communities, and international and nongovernmental organizations.
People & committees
Rep. Berman, Howard L. [D-CA-28] · D–CA
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 motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 396 - 2 (Roll no. 531). (text: CR 9/15/2010 H7609-6710)
House roll call 531 · 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): 396 - 2 (Roll no. 531).(text: CR 9/15/2010 H7609-6710)
House roll call 531 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6791)
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. 1613.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6709-6713)
Mr. Barrow moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
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: 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.1613 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.1613 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.1613 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.1613 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.