PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 19, 2001
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) because of the tragic events of September 11, 2001, the limit on the number of Public Safety Officer Medals of Valor should be waived and a medal should be awarded under the Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor Act of 2001 to any officer who was killed in the line of duty; and (2) the Medal of Valor Review Board should give strong consideration to the acts of bravery by other officers in responding to these events.
People & committees
Sen. Stevens, Ted [R-AK] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Received in the House.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2990-2991; text: CR S2991)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S2990-2991; text: CR S2991)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 348.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy without amendment and with a preamble. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy without amendment and with a preamble. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Submitted in the Senate and ordered held at desk. until the close of business on September 20, 2001. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9513)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9513-9514)
Introduced in Senate
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: Aug 10, 2026. 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.Con.Res.66 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.Con.Res.66 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.Con.Res.66 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.Con.Res.66 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.