PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Foreign Relations. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 109-880.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 1, 2005
Cooperative Proliferation Detection, Interdiction Assistance, and Conventional Threat Reduction Act of 2005 - Cooperative Proliferation Detection and Interdiction Assistance Act of 2005 - Authorizes the President to establish a program to provide proliferation detection and interdiction assistance to friendly foreign countries and requires that at least 25% of the amount made available for nonproliferation, anti-terrorism, demining and related programs and activities for FY2006 shall be made available to establish such program.
Amends the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to authorize the President, in order to promote cooperation regarding the interdiction of weapons of mass destruction and related materials and delivery systems, to conclude agreements (including reciprocal maritime agreements) with other countries to prevent the transportation of such items to states and non-state actors of proliferation concern.
Establishes within the Department of State an Office of Proliferation Detection and Interdiction Assistance Coordination.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides that activities authorized to be carried out under the Nonproliferation and Disarmament Fund in the independent states of the former Soviet Union may also be carried out in other countries and with respect to international organizations when such activities are in the U.S. national interest.
States that the President should ensure that, when in the national security interest of the United States, at least 25% of military assistance furnished will enhance the capabilities of friendly foreign countries to detect or interdict the illicit trafficking of weapons of mass destruction, related materials, and means of delivery and dual-use items of proliferation concern.
Conventional Arms Disarmament Act of 2005 - Authorizes the Secretary of State to carry out an accelerated global program to secure or eliminate stocks of man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS), other conventional weapons, and tactical missile systems, as well as related equipment and facilities that pose a proliferation threat.
Redesignates the (Department of State) Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement as the Office of Conventional Arms Threat Reduction.
People & committees
Sen. Lugar, Richard G. [R-IN] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 109-880.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S12130-12132)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 15, 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.1949 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.1949 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.1949 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.1949 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.