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 28, 2016
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Expresses concern about the disappearance of David Louis Sneddon in Yunnan Province, China, in August 2004.
Encourages: (1) the Department of State and the intelligence community to continue joint investigations, coordinate investigations with the governments of China, Japan, and South Korea, and solicit information from regional affairs and law enforcement experts on plausible explanations for Sneddon's disappearance; (2) the State Department to work with foreign governments known to have diplomatic influence with North Korea; and (3) the intelligence community to assess the possibility of North Korea's involvement in Sneddon's disappearance and to seek his recovery.
Requests the State Department and the intelligence community to continue to work with and inform Congress and Sneddon's family on efforts to resolve his disappearance.
People & committees
Rep. Stewart, Chris [R-UT-2] · R–UT
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 agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection. (text: CR H6058-6059)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.(text: CR H6058-6059)
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H6058-6059)
Committee on Intelligence (Permanent) discharged. (consideration: CR H6058)
Committee on Intelligence (Permanent) discharged.(consideration: CR H6058)
Committee on Foreign Affairs discharged. (consideration: CR H6058)
Committee on Foreign Affairs discharged.(consideration: CR H6058)
Mr. Stewart asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 6, 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.891 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.891 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.891 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.891 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.