PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Resolution agreed to in Senate with an amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR 9/27/2017 S6191)
Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Sep 26, 2017
Expresses the sense of the Senate that: (1) an urgent and comprehensive international diplomatic effort is necessary to address obstacles in Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan, and Yemen that are preventing humanitarian aid from being delivered; and (2) the contributions of U.S. charities, non-profit organizations, religious organizations, and businesses have an important role in addressing humanitarian crises.
Calls for the United States to: (1) encourage other governments to join in providing the resources necessary to address the humanitarian crises in those countries, and (2) work with international partners to support efforts to hold accountable those responsible for deliberate restrictions on humanitarian access in those countries.
Calls for parties to the conflicts in those countries to: (1) allow and facilitate passage of humanitarian relief for civilians in need, and (2) respect and protect humanitarian and medical relief personnel and objects.
People & committees
Sen. Young, Todd [R-IN] · R–IN
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 with an amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR 9/27/2017 S6191)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate with an amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR 9/27/2017 S6191)
The committee substitute withdrawn by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6143)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S6143-6144)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 115.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Corker with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and with an amended preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Corker with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and with an amended preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text as introduced in Senate: CR S2368-2369)
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: Jan 14, 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.114 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.114 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.114 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.114 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.