H.Res.534 / 106th Congress

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the recent nuclear weapons security failures at Los Alamos National Laboratory demonstrate that security policy and security procedures within the National Nuclear Security Administration remain inadequate, that the individuals responsible for such policy and procedures must be held accountable for their performance, and that immediate action must be taken to correct security deficiencies.

On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 391 - 5, 2 Present (Roll no. 401). (text: CR H6072-6073)

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 27, 2000

Expresses the sense of the House that: (1) certain security failures at Los Alamos National Laboratory demonstrate continued inadequacy of nuclear weapons security policy and procedures within the National Nuclear Security Administration and its facilities; (2) individuals responsible for the implementation, oversight, and management of nuclear weapons security policy and procedures within the Administration and its facilities must be held accountable for their performance; and (3) the Administrator for Nuclear Security must take immediate action to improve safeguard procedures for classified nuclear weapons information and correct all identified nuclear weapons security deficiencies within the Administration.

Read the summary on Congress.gov

PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Rep. Spence, Floyd [R-SC-2] · R–SC

Committees

Armed Services Committee

6 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

Jul 17, 2000
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 391 - 5, 2 Present (Roll no. 401). (text: CR H6072-6073)
House roll call 401 · Individual votes
Jul 17, 2000
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Jul 17, 2000
Passed/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): 391 - 5, 2 Present (Roll no. 401).(text: CR H6072-6073)
House roll call 401 · Individual votes
Jul 17, 2000
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6086)
Jul 17, 2000
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.
Jul 17, 2000
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 534.
Jul 17, 2000
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6072-6077
Jul 17, 2000
Mr. Spence moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Jul 12, 2000
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 255.
Jul 12, 2000
Reported by the Committee on Armed Services. H. Rept. 106-730.
Jul 12, 2000
Reported by the Committee on Armed Services. H. Rept. 106-730.
Jun 28, 2000
Ordered to be Reported Without Recommendation by Voice Vote.
Jun 28, 2000
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Jun 27, 2000
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Jun 27, 2000
Introduced in House
Jun 27, 2000
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Engrossed in House · Jul 17, 2000 Formatted Text PDF
Reported in House · Jul 12, 2000 Formatted Text PDF
Introduced in House · Jun 27, 2000 Formatted Text PDF

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Jun 6, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.Res.534 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.534, 106th Congress: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the recent nuclear weapons security failures at Los Alamos National Laboratory demonstrate that security policy and security procedures within the National Nuclear Security Administration remain inadequate, that the individuals responsible for such policy and procedures must be held accountable for their performance, and that immediate action must be taken to correct security deficiencies.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/106th-congress/house-resolution/534

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2000-07-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/106/bills/hres534/BILLS-106hres534eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-06-06T14:17:56Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze H.Res.534 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.Res.534 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.534, 106th Congress: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the recent nuclear weapons security failures at Los Alamos National Laboratory demonstrate that security policy and security procedures within the National Nuclear Security Administration remain inadequate, that the individuals responsible for such policy and procedures must be held accountable for their performance, and that immediate action must be taken to correct security deficiencies.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/106th-congress/house-resolution/534

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2000-07-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/106/bills/hres534/BILLS-106hres534eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-06-06T14:17:56Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.534 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.Res.534 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.534, 106th Congress: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the recent nuclear weapons security failures at Los Alamos National Laboratory demonstrate that security policy and security procedures within the National Nuclear Security Administration remain inadequate, that the individuals responsible for such policy and procedures must be held accountable for their performance, and that immediate action must be taken to correct security deficiencies.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/106th-congress/house-resolution/534

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2000-07-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/106/bills/hres534/BILLS-106hres534eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-06-06T14:17:56Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.534 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.Res.534 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.534, 106th Congress: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the recent nuclear weapons security failures at Los Alamos National Laboratory demonstrate that security policy and security procedures within the National Nuclear Security Administration remain inadequate, that the individuals responsible for such policy and procedures must be held accountable for their performance, and that immediate action must be taken to correct security deficiencies.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/106th-congress/house-resolution/534

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2000-07-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/106/bills/hres534/BILLS-106hres534eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-06-06T14:17:56Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.534 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.