PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S12462-12463)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 23, 1993
Authorizes Senator William Proxmire and any other present or former Senators whose testimony or document production may be required to testify and produce documents in the trial of United States v. Deborah Gore Dean. Directs the Senate Legal Counsel to represent them. Applies the authority provided by: (1) S. Res. 140, 103d Congress, for testimony by present and former Senate employees, to document production by them; and (2) S. Res. 334, 102d Congress, for the production of documents to the Independent Counsel by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, to the production of documents by them to the defendant. Directs the Senate Legal Counsel to represent such Committee in connection with any subpoena of documents.
People & committees
Sen. Mitchell, George J. [D-ME] · D–ME
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 Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S12462-12463)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S12462-12463)
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: 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.Res.146 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.146 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.146 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.146 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.