PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 18, 1996
Commends the U.S. armed forces and U.S. Embassy personnel for the successful evacuation of over 1,795 people from Liberia. Declares that a breakdown of the Abuja process would have disastrous humanitarian ramifications and seriously threaten other U.S. interests in West Africa. Calls upon all factions to reach a cease-fire and recommit themselves to the Abuja process. Urges the Administration to: (1) identify funds that could be either reprogrammed or transferred and used to support additional non-Nigerian West African peacekeepers; (2) consider the provision of excess defense articles for communications and logistical support and training for crowd-control techniques for non-Nigerian troops to participate effectively in a West African peacekeeping force; (3) use its influence with other nations with interests in Liberia to solicit further support for West African peacekeeping forces, including their participation at the April 26 meeting of a newly formed Contact Group in Liberia; and (4) lead United Nations (UN) efforts to activate a Commission to develop an implementation plan and sanctions against those parties violating the UN arms embargo on Liberia.
People & committees
Sen. Feingold, Russell D. [D-WI] · D–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
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.248 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.248 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.248 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.248 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.