PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S10657)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 17, 1996
Entitles the individual who was the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate on September 1, 1996, and whose service as the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate terminated on or after September 1, 1996 but prior to September 6, 1996, to one lump sum payment consisting of severance pay in an amount equal to two months of the individual's basic pay at the rate such individual was paid on September 1, 1996.
People & committees
Sen. Stevens, Ted [R-AK] · R–AK
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 S10657)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S10657)
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: Oct 26, 2016. 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.294 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.294 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.294 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.294 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.