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 · May 17, 2012
Warns that time is limited to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.
Urges continued and increasing economic and diplomatic pressure on Iran to secure an agreement that includes: (1) Iran's suspension of all uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, (2) complete cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on all outstanding questions related to Iran's nuclear activities, and (3) a permanent agreement that verifiably assures that Iran's nuclear program is entirely peaceful. Supports the universal rights and democratic aspirations of the Iranian people.
Affirms that it is a vital U.S. national interest to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.
Supports U.S. policy to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.
Rejects any policy that would rely on efforts to contain a nuclear weapons-capable Iran.
Urges the President to reaffirm the unacceptability of an Iran with nuclear-weapons capability and the opposition to any policy that would rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian nuclear threat.
People & committees
Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [R-FL-18] · R–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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 401 - 11, 9 Present (Roll no. 261). (text: CR 5/15/2012 H2687-2688)
House roll call 261 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 401 - 11, 9 Present (Roll no. 261).(text: CR 5/15/2012 H2687-2688)
House roll call 261 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2846)
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. 568.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2687-2693)
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.568 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.568 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.568 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.568 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.