PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Indefinitely postponed by Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 18, 1993
Expresses the sense of the Senate that the President should: (1) immediately establish an extraordinary nuclear policy review group, chaired by the National Security Advisory and composed of high-level officials from relevant agencies, to seek to ensure that all outstanding issues between the United States and Russia regarding nuclear materials, including the highly enriched uranium agreement, are promptly addressed and resolved; and (2) report to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the findings and recommendations of the group, including the recommendations for expedited administrative resolution of matters relating to the highly enriched uranium agreement and access to U.S. markets for Russian commercial grade uranium.
People & committees
Sen. Pell, Claiborne [D-RI] · D–RI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Indefinitely postponed by Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 300.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Pell. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Pell. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations ordered to be reported an original measure.
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.169 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.169 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.169 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.169 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.