PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.ORDER OF BUSINESS - Mr. Collins asked unanimous consent that the demand for the Yeas and Nays on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 572 be vacated. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 12, 2000
Expresses that it is the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) the United States and the Republic of India should continue to expand and strengthen bilateral security, economic, and political ties; (2) the United States should consider removing existing unilateral legislative and administrative measures which prevent the normalization of U.S.-India bilateral economic and trade relations; (3) established institutional and collaborative mechanisms should be maintained and enhanced to further a partnership between the two countries; (4) it is vitally important that the United States and India continue to share information and intensify their cooperation in combating terrorism; and (5) the upcoming visit of the Prime Minister of India, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, to the United States is a significant step toward broadening and deepening the friendship and cooperation between the United States and India.
People & committees
Rep. Gilman, Benjamin A. [R-NY-20] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
ORDER OF BUSINESS - Mr. Collins asked unanimous consent that the demand for the Yeas and Nays on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 572 be vacated. Agreed to without objection.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H7491)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7491)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 572.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7491-7493)
Mr. Gilman moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR 9/13/2000 E1459-1460)
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.572 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.572 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.572 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.572 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.