PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR 12/22/2005 S14402-14403; text as passed Senate: CR 12/22/2005 S14402-14403; text of measure as introduced: CR 12/22/2005 S14334-14335)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Dec 21, 2005
States that: (1) since the Republic of Croatia became an independent country, the government and people of Croatia have made significant progress in strengthening democratic institutions, respect for human rights, and the rule of law in Croatia; and (2) Croatia's membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would contribute to stability in Southeast Europe;
Expresses the sense of the Senate that: (1) the government and people of Croatia should be commended for their progress on protecting minority rights in Croatia, progress toward achieving the political, economic, military, and other requirements of the NATO's Membership Action Plan, contribution to the International Security Assistance Force and the war against terrorism, and for their constructive participation in the Proliferation Security Initiative and in the United States-Adriatic Charter; (2) the government of Croatia should be commended for its cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia which led to the apprehension and transfer of several individuals indicted for war crimes to the Tribunal; (3) the government of Croatia should continue its cooperation with the Tribunal; (4) the government of Croatia should continue and strengthen its role as a partner on nonproliferation and its support in the war against terrorism and in Iraq; (5) the government of Croatia should continue its efforts to implement defense reforms; (6) the United States should continue and increase its defense and security cooperation with the Croatia; and (7) upon complete satisfaction of NATO membership criteria, Croatia should be invited to be a full member of NATO at the earliest possible date.
People & committees
Sen. Voinovich, George V. [R-OH] · R–OH
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 and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR 12/22/2005 S14402-14403; text as passed Senate: CR 12/22/2005 S14402-14403; text of measure as introduced: CR 12/22/2005 S14334-14335)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR 12/22/2005 S14402-14403; text as passed Senate: CR 12/22/2005 S14402-14403; text of measure as introduced: CR 12/22/2005 S14334-14335)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 12, 2023. 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.342 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.342 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.342 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.342 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.