PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5543)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 13, 2002
Expresses the sense of the Senate that: (1) the failure of the International Whaling Commission to renew aboriginal whaling quotas is inconsistent with the understandings on which the Commission is based and jeopardizes its continued existence as a meaningful international body; and (2) regardless of any Commission action, the U.S. Government should take steps to ensure the continuance of scientifically sound aboriginal subsistence whaling by the Inupiat people of Alaska.
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.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5543)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5543-5544)
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.285 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.285 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.285 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.285 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.