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 S4239; text as passed Senate: CR S4239; text of measure as introduced: CR S4236)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 29, 2011
Expresses the sense of the Senate: (1) recognizing the opening of the Tom Lantos Institute in Budapest, Hungary; (2) acknowledging the government of Hungary for honoring the legacy of Congressman Lantos; (3) supporting the principles of the Institute, including democracy, pluralism, and human and minority rights; (4) supporting the education of present and future generations in Central and Eastern Europe which will contribute to regional cooperation, historical reconciliation, and tolerance throughout the Euro-Atlantic region; and (5) encouraging the people and the governments of the United States and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe to continue to deepen their relations.
People & committees
Sen. Kerry, John F. [D-MA] · D–MA
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 S4239; text as passed Senate: CR S4239; text of measure as introduced: CR S4236)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S4239; text as passed Senate: CR S4239; text of measure as introduced: CR S4236)
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 10, 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.220 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.220 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.220 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.220 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.