PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S13435)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 27, 1994
Amends Senate Resolution 75 (103d Congress, 1st session) to require the Jacob K. Javits Foundation, Inc., to: (1) broadly publicize the availability of the Jacob K. Javits Senate Fellowship Program; (2) develop and administer an application process for Senate fellowships; (3) conduct a screening of applicants for the Program; and (4) select participants without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability. Requires the Secretary of the Senate to assist in the placement of fellowship participants in positions supportive of their academic programs, if practicable. Considers Fellows as employees of the office or committee in which they are placed. Requires the Secretary to submit to the Majority and Minority Leaders of the Senate an evaluation report and recommendations concerning the Program's extension and continued funding level three months before the Program expires.
People & committees
Sen. Mitchell, George J. [D-ME] · D–ME
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 by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S13435)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S13435)
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: Jun 2, 2021. 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.269 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.269 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.269 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.269 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.