PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organizations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 25, 2014
Supports the people of South Sudan and the region.
Condemns attacks on civilians and civilian humanitarian assistance workers.
Urges the President to work with the international community to provide technical support to the African Union Commission of Inquiry into human rights abuses, and to consider creation of a tribunal to ensure those responsible for civilian attacks and grave human rights abuses are held accountable.
Emphasizes the need for the government of South Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement in Opposition to implement the January 23, 2014, cessation of hostilities agreement.
Encourages the government of South Sudan to implement the June 10, 2014, transitional government agreement.
Supports the Intergovernmental Authority on Development's mediation efforts.
People & committees
Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-13] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organizations.
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: Jan 23, 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.689 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.689 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.689 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.689 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.