PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 422 - 0 (Roll no. 129). (text as passed House: CR 4/09/2003 H3009-3010)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 27, 2003
Expresses the appreciation of the House of Representatives for the efforts of the United Nations Secretary General to seek a peaceful, just, and lasting settlement of the Cyprus problem for the benefit of the people of Cyprus and the region.Expresses its strong disappointment that the Secretary General's efforts to bring his plan for a comprehensive settlement to a referenda by the people of Cyprus has been rejected.Expresses its very strong regret that Turkish Cypriot leader, Mr. Denktash, rejected the comprehensive settlement offered by the Secretary General and denied the Turkish Cypriot people the opportunity to determine their own future by refusing to offer the settlement proposal to referenda.Declares that the House remains committed, despite the recent setback, to giving any assistance necessary for finding a just and durable settlement for the Cyprus problem and urges the maximum effort by the U.S. Government and others to redouble their efforts to seek a just and lasting settlement to the Cyprus problem.Encourages both Greek and Turkish Cypriot leaders to renew their efforts to find a settlement to the Cyprus problem on the basis of the Secretary General's framework.Urges the Governments of Turkey and Greece to do everything possible to support the search for a settlement, including actions by the Government of Turkey helping to persuade the Turkish Cypriot leader to reach an agreement which would reunite the island and which would serve the interests of both Cypriot communities.Encourages both sides, upon completion of a comprehensive settlement, to consider putting it to referenda, if necessary, in order that the will of the people of Cyprus can be democratically expressed.
People & committees
Rep. Bereuter, Doug [R-NE-1] · R–NE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 422 - 0 (Roll no. 129). (text as passed House: CR 4/09/2003 H3009-3010)
House roll call 129 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/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): 422 - 0 (Roll no. 129).(text as passed House: CR 4/09/2003 H3009-3010)
House roll call 129 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3077)
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. 165.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3009-3014)
Mr. Bereuter moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Europe.
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.165 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.165 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.165 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.165 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.