PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 8, 2009
Expresses commitment to the welfare and survival of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state with secure borders and recognizes its right to act in self-defense.
Reiterates that Hamas must end the rocket and mortar attacks against Israel, recognize Israel's right to exist, renounce violence, agree to accept previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinians, and dismantle its terrorist infrastructure.
Encourages the Administration to work to support a sustainable cease-fire in Gaza that prevents Hamas from retaining or rebuilding its terrorist infrastructure.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
States that the lives of innocent civilians must be protected to the maximum extent possible.
Calls on all nations to: (1) condemn Hamas for embedding its fighters, leaders, and weapons in private homes, schools, mosques, hospitals, and otherwise using Palestinian civilians as human shields while simultaneously targeting Israeli civilians; and (2) lay blame for the breaking of the calm and for subsequent civilian casualties on Hamas.
Supports efforts to diminish the influence of extremists in the Palestinian territories.
Calls: (1) on Egypt to intensify its efforts to halt smuggling between Gaza and Egypt; and (2) for the release of the kidnaped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.
Reiterates support for a two-state resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
People & committees
Rep. Pelosi, Nancy [D-CA-8] · 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 Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 390 - 5, 22 Present (Roll no. 10). (text: CR H95)
House roll call 10 · 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): 390 - 5, 22 Present (Roll no. 10).(text: CR H95)
House roll call 10 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H138-139)
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. 34.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H95-113)
Mr. Berman moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
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.34 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.34 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.34 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.34 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.