PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 22, 1999
Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to provide that if the United States initiates a retaliation list (list of products of a foreign country that has failed to comply with the report of the panel or Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO)), or the United States Trade Representative (USTR) takes specified trade action against the goods of a foreign country because of its failure to implement the recommendation made pursuant to a dispute settlement proceeding under the WTO, the USTR shall periodically revise the list or action to affect the other goods of the country. Declares that the USTR is not required to revise the retaliation list or the action with respect to a country, if: (1) the USTR determines that implementation of the recommendation by the country is imminent; or (2) the USTR together with the petitioner involved in the initial unfair trade investigation (or if no petition was filed, the affected U.S. industry) agree that it is unnecessary to revise the retaliation list.
People & committees
Sen. DeWine, Mike [R-OH] · R–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11260-11261)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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 S.1619 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 S.1619 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 S.1619 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 S.1619 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.