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 · Oct 18, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Declares that the House of Representatives: (1) mourns the tragic loss of life and horrendous suffering caused by the earthquake that occurred on October 8, 2005, in Pakistan and India; (2) expresses the deepest condolences of the American people to the families, communities, and governments of the tens of thousands of individuals who lost their lives, and gratitude and respect for the work of all individuals providing aid, relief and assistance, including U.S. civilian and military personnel; (3) welcomes and commends the prompt international humanitarian response to the earthquake by the governments of many countries, the United Nations (UN) and other international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations; and (4) supports the actions to assist the victims taken by the President and the federal government to provide all appropriate assistance to the governments and people of the affected region.
People & committees
Rep. Hyde, Henry J. [R-IL-6] · 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 Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 423 - 0 (Roll no. 526). (text: CR H8864-8865)
House roll call 526 · 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): 423 - 0 (Roll no. 526).(text: CR H8864-8865)
House roll call 526 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8889-8890)
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. 492.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8864-8868)
Mr. Hyde moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
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.492 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.492 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.492 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.492 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.