PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5610-5611; text as passed Senate: CR S5610-5611; text of measure as introduced: CR S5603-5604)
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · May 3, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Expresses the sense of the Senate that the Soviet Union's decades-long occupation of Estonia was illegal and a violation of Estonia's sovereignty.
Expresses support for Estonia as a sovereign state and a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Condemns: (1) recent acts of violence and looting in Estonia; (2) attacks and threats against Estonia's embassies and officials in Russia and other countries; and (3) political efforts to exploit the memory of the victims of the Second World War.
Urges all activists to express their views peacefully.
Honors the sacrifice of all those, including Red Army soldiers, who gave their lives to defeat Nazism.
Supports the government of Estonia's efforts to initiate a peaceful dialogue with the government of the Russian Federation.
Urges the governments of all countries to: (1) condemn the violence that has occurred in Estonia, Moscow, and elsewhere in 2007, and to urge all parties to express their views peacefully; (2) assist the government of Estonia in its cyber-attacks investigation; and (3) fulfill their obligations under the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
People & committees
Sen. Voinovich, George V. [R-OH] · R–OH
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 Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5610-5611; text as passed Senate: CR S5610-5611; text of measure as introduced: CR S5603-5604)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S5610-5611; text as passed Senate: CR S5610-5611; text of measure as introduced: CR S5603-5604)
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 11, 2023. 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.187 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.187 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.187 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.187 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.