PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5124)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 24, 2006
Amends Rule XXXVII (Conflict of Interest) of the Standing Rules of the Senate to prohibit Members of the Senate from using any charitable tax-exempt organization for personal or political gain.
Specifies conditions under which a Senator shall be considered to have used such organization for such purpose.
Requires Senators and their employees to disclose to the Secretary of the Senate the identity of any person who makes to such an organization a contribution of over $200 and of which such Member or employee knows.
Requires the Secretary to make such disclosures public.
Authorizes the Select Committee on Ethics to grant a waiver to Members with respect to this Act in the case of an organization over whose affairs the Member's spouse, but not the Member, is in a position to exercise substantial influence.
People & committees
Sen. Baucus, Max [D-MT] · D–MT
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 Rules and Administration. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5124)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5124-5125)
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.492 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.492 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.492 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.492 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.