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 S6081-6082; text as passed Senate: CR S6081-6082; text of measure as introduced: CR S6025)
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Jun 24, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Expresses condolences to the families and friends of those who lost their lives following the tornado that hit the Little Sioux Scout Ranch in Little Sioux, Iowa, on June 11, 2008: Sam Thomsen, Josh Fennen, Ben Petrzilka, and Aaron Eilerts. Shares thoughts and prayers for a full recovery for those who were injured.
Commends the Boy Scouts of America for the support the organization has provided to the families and friends of those lost and injured. Extends thanks to those who took quick action to provide aid and comfort to the victims.
People & committees
Sen. Nelson, Ben [D-NE] · D–NE
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 S6081-6082; text as passed Senate: CR S6081-6082; text of measure as introduced: CR S6025)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6081-6082; text as passed Senate: CR S6081-6082; text of measure as introduced: CR S6025)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 14, 2017. 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.599 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.599 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.599 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.599 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.