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 · Oct 10, 2002
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that President Jiang Zemin of the People's Republic of China should be made aware of congressional concern for the Panchen Lama and the need to resolve the situation in Tibet through dialogue with the Dalai Lama or his representatives.Calls on the Chinese Government to: (1) release the Panchen Lama and allow him to pursue his traditional role at Tashi Lhunpo monastery in Tibet; and (2) negotiate with the Dalai Lama or his representatives to find a solution for genuine autonomy that respects the rights of all Tibetans.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4] · R–NJ
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 agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection. (text: CR 10/24/2002 H8038; wrong version inadvertently printed on 10/10/2002 H7885)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.(text: CR 10/24/2002 H8038; wrong version inadvertently printed on 10/10/2002 H7885)
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H7859-7887)
Mr. Armey asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Committee on International Relations discharged.
Committee on International Relations discharged.
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.410 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.410 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.410 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.410 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.