Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a Presidential commission should be established to investigate whether there has been any measurable depletion of stratospheric ozone beyond that caused by natural phenomena, whether it has been proven that the use of chloroflourocarbons damages stratospheric ozone, and whether the phaseout of chloroflourocarbons will have any effect on stratospheric ozone.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 28, 1993
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) a presidential commission should be established to investigate whether there has been any measurable depletion of stratospheric ozone beyond the seasonal variations caused by natural phenomena; (2) such commission should investigate whether it has been proven that the use of man-made chlorofluorocarbons damages stratospheric ozone and whether the phaseout of chlorofluorocarbons will have any effect on ozone levels in the stratosphere; and (3) the membership of the commission should be equally apportioned between representatives from the scientific community whose published research shows that chlorofluorocarbons have a negligible effect on ozone depletion and representatives whose research makes contrary claims.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.Res.291 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.Res.291 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.Res.291 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.Res.291 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.