PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1369)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 24, 2003
Condemns in the harshest terms the recent terrorist actions that victimized innocent Israelis.Expresses solidarity with the Israeli people as they respond to ongoing terrorist attacks, and sympathy to the families of innocent Israelis and Palestinians who have lost their lives.Commends the President of the United States for his vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.Affirms that this vision can be fully realized only once terrorism is defeated, so that a new state may be created based on rule of law and respect for human rights.Recognizes and respects Israel's right to fight terrorism and acknowledges Israel's fight against terrorism as part of the global war against terrorism.Calls on all states to cease recognition of and political and material support for any Palestinian and other terrorist groups.Calls on all states immediately to: (1) establish effective mechanisms to ensure that funding from private citizens cannot be directed to terrorist groups for any purpose whatsoever, including ostensible humanitarian purposes; (2) provide support to the Palestinian Authority in its effort to confront and fight terror; and (3) assist the Palestinian people in creating the institutions of a democratic state that will respect the rule of law and live in peace with its neighbors.
People & committees
Rep. Lantos, Tom [D-CA-12] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1369)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 399 - 5, 7 Present (Roll no. 317). (text: CR H5853)
House roll call 317 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 399 - 5, 7 Present (Roll no. 317).(text: CR H5853)
House roll call 317 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5882-5883)
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 - By unanimous consent, an additional debate time was granted, to be equally divided and controlled.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 294.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5853-5866)
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
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.294 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.294 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.294 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.294 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.