A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that the President, acting through the United States Agency for International Development, should more effectively secure emergency famine relief for the people of Sudan, and for other purposes.
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9666-9668)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 31, 1998
Expresses the sense of the Senate that the President, acting through the U.S. Agency for International Development (AID), should: (1) aggressively seek to secure emergency famine relief for the people of Sudan; (2) immediately take steps to distribute that famine relief to affected areas in Sudan; (3) encourage and assist Operation Lifeline Sudan and the ongoing efforts to develop relief distribution networks for affected areas of Sudan outside of the umbrella and associated constraints of the Operation; (4) begin providing development assistance in areas of Sudan not controlled by the regime in Khartoum with the goals of building self-sufficiency and avoiding the same conditions which have created the current crisis and providing for longer-term economic, civil, and democratic development, without regard to the constraints that now compromise the ability of the Operation to distribute famine relief or that could constrain future multilateral relief arrangements. Calls for the AID Administrator to submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees on AID's progress toward meeting these goals. Calls for the President, both bilaterally and through the United Nations, to aggressively seek to change the terms by which the Operation and other groups are prohibited from providing necessary relief according to the true needs of the people of Sudan.
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9666-9668)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9666-9668)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.Res.267 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.Res.267 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.Res.267 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.Res.267 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.