PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 5, 2007
Expresses support for Estonia as a sovereign state and a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
Condemns: (1) recent acts of violence and looting in Estonia; (2) attacks and threats against Estonia's embassies and officials in Russia and other countries; and (3) political efforts to exploit the memory of the victims of the Second World War.
Urges all activists to express their views peacefully.
Honors the sacrifice of all those, including Red Army soldiers, who gave their lives to defeat Nazism.
Supports the government of Estonia's efforts to initiate a peaceful dialogue with the government of the Russian Federation.
Urges the governments of all countries to: (1) condemn the violence that has occurred in Estonia, Moscow, and elsewhere in 2007, and to urge all parties to express their views peacefully; (2) assist the government of Estonia in its cyber-attacks investigation; and (3) fulfill their obligations under the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
People & committees
Rep. Shimkus, John [R-IL-19] · R–IL
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, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 412 - 0 (Roll no. 426). (text: CR H5952)
House roll call 426 · Individual votesPassed/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): 412 - 0 (Roll no. 426).(text: CR H5952)
House roll call 426 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5976-5977)
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. 397.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5952-5954)
Mr. Lantos moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Committee Agreed to Seek Consideration Under Suspension of the Rules, (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.397 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.397 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.397 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.397 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.