PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Yea-Nay Vote. 97-0. Record Vote No: 133. (consideration: CR S5638)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 24, 1995
Condemns the bombing at the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Sends condolences to the families. Commends rescue and volunteer workers, law enforcement officials, and the President. Urges the President to use all necessary means to find and punish the perpetrators. Supports the President's and Attorney General's position that Federal prosecutors will seek the maximum penalty allowed by law, including the death penalty, for those responsible. Declares that the Senate will expeditiously approve legislation to strengthen the authority and resources of all Federal agencies involved in combating such acts of terrorism.
People & committees
Sen. Nickles, Don [R-OK] · R–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Yea-Nay Vote. 97-0. Record Vote No: 133. (consideration: CR S5638)
Senate roll call 133 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Yea-Nay Vote. 97-0. Record Vote No: 133.(consideration: CR S5638)
Senate roll call 133 · Individual votesSponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5626-5627)
Measure laid before Senate. (consideration: CR S5564)
Submitted in the Senate.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5562-5563)
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.Res.110 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.110 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.110 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.110 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.