PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 4, 1994
Expresses the sense of the Congress that the U.S. delegation to the Spring 1995 meeting of the Facilitation Division of the International Civil Aviation Organization: (1) seek to amend the Convention on International Civil Aviation, done on December 7, 1944, at Chicago, to end aircraft disinsection practices that threaten the health of aircraft passengers and crew; and (2) make every effort to gain the support of other member nations of the organization in that amendment.
People & committees
Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] · D–VT
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.
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.
Mr. Oberstar asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and consider.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H10922-10923)
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S14079)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S14079)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jun 2, 2021. 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.77 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.77 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.77 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.77 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.