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 · Sep 19, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Recognizes the selfless commitment to U.S. national security and to Libya's transitional democracy by the brave U.S. citizens who lost their lives in the unjustified attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Expresses deepest condolences to the families and loved ones of those U.S. public servants killed in Benghazi, Libya.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Condemns the terrorists who planned and conducted the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and those who vandalized the U.S. embassies in Cairo, Egypt, and Sana'a, Yemen.
Expresses concern about the security situation in Libya, Egypt, and Yemen, and with the threat posed to the region and U.S. interests by extremists and terrorists.
Expresses appreciation for the actions of those who sought to protect the U.S. diplomats and diplomatic facilities.
Calls upon all governments to continue to work closely with the Department of State to: (1) ensure security of diplomatic facilities, (2) secure their borders, and (3) combat terrorists and extremists who operate within their sovereign territory.
Calls upon the governments of Libya, Egypt, and Yemen, in full cooperation with the U.S. government, to bring the perpetrators of these attacks to justice.
Reiterates the commitment of the United States to promoting its core values, including support for democracy, human rights, individual and religious freedom, and respect for human dignity.
People & committees
Rep. Boehner, John A. [R-OH-8] · R–OH
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 voice vote. (text: CR H6076-6077)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6076-6077)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 786.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6076-6079)
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
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: 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.786 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.786 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.786 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.786 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.