PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Sep 24, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Expresses the commitment of the House of Representatives to giving victims involved in missing persons and unidentified human remains cases a voice.
Calls for: (1) continuing federal funding for DNA testing and the Combined DNA Index System; (2) greater cooperation between law enforcement agencies; (3) more comprehensive training and education for law enforcement agencies involved in missing person and unidentified human remains cases; (4) providing medical examiners and coroners with greater access to federal databases to compare evidence; and (5) efforts to raise awareness among victim service providers and the general public about the use of DNA and the Combined DNA Index System to identify the unidentified dead.
People & committees
Rep. Chabot, Steve [R-OH-1] · R–OH
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): 389 - 1 (Roll no. 894). (text: CR H10729)
House roll call 894 · 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): 389 - 1 (Roll no. 894).(text: CR H10729)
House roll call 894 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H10736)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 340.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10729-10730)
Mr. Scott (VA) moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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: Jan 2, 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.340 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.340 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.340 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.340 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.