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 13, 1998
Commends: (1) the Government of Gabon's ongoing efforts to resolve central African conflicts; (2) those Gabonese who have demonstrated their love for free and fair elections; and (3) the Gabonese Government for inviting the International Foundation of Electoral Systems (IFES) to perform a pre-election assessment study. Calls on the Gabonese Government to: (1) take further measures to help ensure a credible election and the independence and impartiality of the election commission; (2) further welcome IFES, the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute, or other appropriate international nongovernmental organizations to aid the organization and oversight of the December 1998 Presidential election in Gabon in an effort to ensure that these elections are free and fair; and (3) take all necessary and lawful steps toward conducting free and fair elections. Calls on: (1) the international community to join the United States in offering assistance toward conducting free and fair elections in Gabon; (2) the U.S. Government to continue to provide support directly and through appropriate nongovernmental organizations toward that end; and (3) the U.S. Government and the international community to continue to encourage the Gabonese Government to ensure a lasting and committed transition to democracy.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Alcee L. [D-FL-23] · D–FL
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 voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Considered as unfinished business.
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Hastings (FL) objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10728-10730, H10799)
Mr. Gilman 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 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.518 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.518 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.518 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.518 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.