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 · Jan 1, 2013
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Urges European governments and the European Union (EU) to: (1) designate Hizballah as a terrorist organization so that Hizballah cannot use EU territories for fund raising, recruitment, and propaganda; and (2) impose sanctions on Hizballah for providing material support to Bashar al Assad's violent repression against the people of Syria.
Supports Bulgaria's investigation into the July 18, 2012, terrorist attack in Burgas, and urges the President to provide related diplomatic, intelligence, and law enforcement support.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Supports Bulgaria as a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and urges the United States, NATO, and the EU to work with Bulgaria to safeguard its territory and citizens from terrorism.
Urges the President to: (1) provide diplomatic, intelligence, and law enforcement support to Bulgaria to investigate the Burgas terrorist attack; and (2) make available to European allies and the European public information about Hizballah's terrorist activities, efforts to subvert democracy in Lebanon, and material support for Bashar al Assad's campaign of violence in Syria.
People & committees
Rep. Kelly, Mike [R-PA-3] · R–PA
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 12/31/2012 H7503-7504)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 12/31/2012 H7503-7504)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7560)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Engel objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was considered as withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 834.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7503-7506)
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.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.834 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.834 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.834 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.834 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.