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 · Feb 15, 2013
Condemns North Korea for its: (1) violations of multiple United Nations (U.N.) Security Council resolutions, (2) provocations that threaten international peace, and (3) February 12, 2013, test of a nuclear device.
Expresses solidarity with the people of North Korea who suffer material deprivation and denial of their basic human rights and political liberties.
Reaffirms the commitment of the United States to its alliances with Japan and South Korea.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Calls upon China to: (1) pressure North Korean leaders to curtail their provocative behavior, abandon their nuclear and missile programs, and comply with all relevant international agreements and resolutions; and (2) prevent the transshipment of illicit technology, military equipment, and dual-use items through its territory, waters, and airspace that could be used in North Korea's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs.
Calls on the U.S. government to: (1) apply all available, and seek additional, sanctions on North Korea; (2) utilize legal authorities and resources to defend U.S. interests against North Korean illicit activities; and (3) support the President's commitment to strengthen the U.S. ballistic missile defense system.
People & committees
Rep. Royce, Edward R. [R-CA-39] · R–CA
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): 412 - 2 (Roll no. 45). (text: CR H555)
House roll call 45 · 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): 412 - 2 (Roll no. 45).(text: CR H555)
House roll call 45 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H568-569)
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. 65.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H555-558)
Mr. Royce 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.
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.65 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.65 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.65 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.65 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.