PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Yea-Nay Vote. 81-19. Record Vote No: 195. (consideration: CR S7911-7912, S7919-7920)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 23, 1997
Expresses the sense of the Senate that: (1) the failure of the Government of Canada to stop Canadian fishing vessels from blockading and to allow the passage of a certain U.S. passenger vessel through Canadian waters should be condemned; (2) the President should take steps to protect U.S. interests and should not tolerate threats to those interests from the action or inaction of a foreign government or its citizens; (3) the President should provide assistance to States and U.S. citizens seeking damages in Canada that have resulted from such illegal or harassing actions; and (4) the President should use all appropriate means, including sanctions like selected import restrictions, to compel the Government of Canada to prevent any such further actions against the United States, its citizens, or interests.
People & committees
Sen. Murkowski, Frank H. [R-AK] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Yea-Nay Vote. 81-19. Record Vote No: 195. (consideration: CR S7911-7912, S7919-7920)
Senate roll call 195 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Yea-Nay Vote. 81-19. Record Vote No: 195.(consideration: CR S7911-7912, S7919-7920)
Senate roll call 195 · Individual votesIntroduced 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: Oct 26, 2016. 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.Res.109 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.Res.109 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.Res.109 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.Res.109 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.