PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S14234-14235)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 28, 1994
Expresses the sense of the Senate that U.S. policy toward Taiwan should: (1) welcome the President of the Republic of China on Taiwan and other high-level Government officials to the United States; (2) allow unrestricted office calls by all representatives of Taiwan in the United States to all U.S. departments and agencies; (3) send cabinet-level officials to Taiwan on a regular basis; (4) support a proposal in the United Nations for formal observer status for Taiwan, a proposal for its full admission into a wide range of international organizations, and participation of the President of the Republic of China on Taiwan in the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum; (5) change the name of Taiwan's representative office in the United States to the "Taipei Representative Office"; (6) approve defensive arms sales to Taiwan based solely on Taiwan's self-defense needs; (7) require advice and consent of the Senate for the highest level U.S. representative in Taiwan; (8) upgrade the status of the existing American Institute in Taiwan; (9) include a report by the Secretary of State to specified congressional committees on U.S. relations with Taiwan; and (10) raise U.S. concerns about the People's Republic of China's threat to forcefully reunify with Taiwan.
People & committees
Sen. Murkowski, Frank H. [R-AK] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S14234-14235)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S14234-14235)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 696.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported to Senate by Senator Pell without amendment and with a preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported to Senate by Senator Pell without amendment and with a preamble. Without written report.
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.270 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.270 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.270 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.270 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.