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 · Mar 8, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
States that a precondition for the integration of Belarus into the Western community of nations is its establishment of a genuinely democratic political system.
Expresses support for the efforts of the Belarusian people to establish a full democracy, the rule of law, and respect for human rights in Belarus.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Urges the government of Belarus to: (1) guarantee freedom of association and assembly, and (2) meet its Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) standards and commitments on democratic elections.
Urges the Belarusian authorities to ensure: (1) transparency procedures for the 2006 presidential election; (2) election monitor access; (3) multiparty representation on all election commissions; (4) media access by all parties and candidates; (5) freedom of candidates, members of opposition parties, and independent media organizations from government harassment; and (6) prosecution of election law violators.
Encourages the international community to continue efforts to support democracy in Belarus and urges countries such as Lithuania and other Baltic countries and Nordic countries to continue to provide assistance to nongovernmental organizations and other Belarusian organizations involved in promoting democracy and fair elections.
Pledges support to the Belarusian people, their commitment to a democratic system and creation of a free market economy, and their country's assumption of its place as a full and equal member of the Western community of democracies.
People & committees
Rep. Shimkus, John [R-IL-19] · R–IL
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): 419 - 1, 2 Present (Roll no. 25). (text: CR H699-700)
House roll call 25 · 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): 419 - 1, 2 Present (Roll no. 25).(text: CR H699-700)
House roll call 25 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H738)
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. 673.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H699-702)
Mr. Smith (NJ) moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
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.
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.
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.673 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.673 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.673 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.673 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.