PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 8, 2006
States that the United States remains committed to the creation of a new Human Rights Council to replace the discredited United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC).
Urges the President and the governments of other U.N. member countries to continue with negotiations for the creation of a Human Rights Council.
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that a credible Human Rights Council would: (1) establish membership criteria that would exclude the worst human rights abusers, including exclusion of member countries subject to U.N. Security Council sanctions; (2) include Israel's full participation; (3) set a size limit consistent with ensuring that only countries that respect human rights are members of the primary U.N. human rights body; (4) exclude any provision that prevents the consecutive election of member countries to the Council; and (5) utilize a formula for the distribution of membership among U.N. member countries that gives priority to countries that respect human rights, while also giving consideration to geographical distribution, the representation of different forms of civilization, and the principal legal systems.
People & committees
Rep. Harris, Katherine [R-FL-13] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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: Jan 2, 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.714 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.714 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.714 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.714 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.