To express the sense of the House of Representatives concerning actions that the President of the United States should take to resolve the dispute between the Allied Pilots Associations and American Airlines.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 13, 1997
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives concerning actions that the President should take to resolve the labor dispute between the Allied Pilots Association and AMR, the parent company of American Airlines. Declares that the President should: (1) monitor the National Mediation Board's attempt to help resolve such dispute; (2) encourage settling the issues in such dispute through use of Board services before the strike deadline, or achieving, by such deadline, the parties' agreement to arbitrate the issues through the Board; and (3) if recommended by the Board, promptly establish an emergency board, under specified provisions of the Railway Labor Act, to investigate and report on matters relating to such dispute.
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
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.67 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
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.Res.67 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
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.Res.67 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
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.Res.67 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.