PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
S.Res.273 / 114th Congress

A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the need for reconciliation in Indonesia and disclosure by the United States Government of events surrounding the mass killings during 1965 and 1966.

Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S7105)

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 1, 2015

Condemns the 1965-1966 mass murder in Indonesia, and expresses concern about the lack of accountability enjoyed by those who carried out such crimes.

Urges Indonesian political leaders to consider a truth, justice, and reconciliation commission to address alleged crimes against humanity and other human rights violations.

Calls on the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the Central Intelligence Agency, and others involved in developing and implementing policy towards Indonesia during such time period to establish an interagency working group to:

locate, recommend for declassification, and make available to the public all classified records and documents concerning such mass killings, including records and documents pertaining to covert operations in Indonesia from January 1, 1964, through March 30, 1966;

coordinate with federal agencies and take such actions as necessary to expedite the public release of such records; and

submit a related report to Congress.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Udall, Tom [D-NM] · D–NM

Committees

  • Foreign Relations Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S7105)

    2. Introduced in Senate

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    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.

    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.273 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.273 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.273 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.273 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.

    View full prompt & sources