PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 15, 2000
Calls upon the President: (1) to immediately review the entry into the U.S. customs territory of all steel products from Australia, China, South Africa, Ukraine, Indonesia, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea, or Brazil; and (2) if it is found that the Governments of such countries are not abiding by the terms of international trade agreements with respect to imports of steel products into the United States, to immediately impose a one-year ban on the imports of all steel products from the offending countries.Urges the President to: (1) establish a task force within the executive branch to monitor imports of steel products into the United States from other countries to determine whether or not international trade agreements are being violated; and (2) report to Congress by July 1, 2000, on any other actions the President has taken, or intends to take, to ensure that all U.S. trading partners abide by the terms of such trade agreements.
People & committees
Rep. Traficant, James A., Jr. [D-OH-17] · D–OH
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 Trade.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H938-939)
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.442 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.442 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.442 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.442 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.