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 · Apr 6, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Expresses support for the government of Romania's desire to improve the standard of care and well-being of children in Romania.
Urges the government of Romania to: (1) complete the processing of certain intercountry adoption cases; and (2) amend its child welfare and adoption laws to decrease adoption barriers.
Urges the Secretary of State and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to work with the government of Romania to achieve these ends.
Requests that the European Union (EU) and its member states not impede the government of Romania's efforts to place orphaned or abandoned children in permanent homes in a manner that is consistent with Romania's obligations under the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4] · R–NJ
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): 428 - 0 (Roll no. 95). (text: CR 4/05/2006 H1475-1476)
House roll call 95 · 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): 428 - 0 (Roll no. 95).(text: CR 4/05/2006 H1475-1476)
House roll call 95 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1622-1623)
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. 578.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1475-1479)
Mr. Smith (NJ) moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Unanimous Consent.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Europe and Emerging Threats.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2538-2540)
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.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 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.578 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.578 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.578 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.578 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.