PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Africa.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 9, 2000
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives commending Michael Horowitz for his actions on February 2, 2000, in working to raise the knowledge of the American public about the conflict in Sudan and the lack of: (1) direct action on the part of the Administration to support those in the south who are fighting against the totalitarian northern regime in Khartoum; (2) involvement by the Administration in acting as an international voice of support for a comprehensive peace process; and (3) action taken by the Administration against companies such as Canada's Talisman Energy, Inc., which is traded on the New York Stock Exchange, and the proposed Initial Public Offer (IPO) of the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) for their involvement in oil ventures in Sudan, which seek to strengthen the power and financial capability of the Government of Sudan at the detriment of those in the south.
People & committees
Rep. Tancredo, Thomas G. [R-CO-6] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Africa.
Referred to the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights.
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: 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.421 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.421 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.421 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.421 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.