PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.Res.76 / 108th Congress

Condemning the terrorist attacks in Mombasa, Kenya, which occurred on November 28, 2002.

Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 12, 2003

Condemns the terrorist attacks in Mombasa, Kenya, which occurred on November 28, 2002, in which innocent Kenyan and Israeli civilians were targeted.Urges the President to seek the cooperation of all countries in the war on terrorism, including through the prohibition of financial support for Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations in the Middle East and Africa and through opposing the glorification of suicide bombers and other terrorists.Urges the United States, Kenya, and Israel to stand united in the global war on terrorism and to work together to bring to justice the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks in Mombasa, Kenya.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Wynn, Albert Russell [D-MD-4] · D–MD

Committees

  • Foreign Affairs Committee
37 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.

  2. Introduced in House

  3. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

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.76 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.76 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.76 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.76 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.

View full prompt & sources