A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that the Senate should not vote on the nomination of Michael Pack to be Chief Executive Officer of the United States Agency for Global Media unless and until Michael Pack corrects his false statements to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Internal Revenue Service.
Referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration. (text: CR S2698-2699)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 3, 2020
This resolution urges the Senate to (1) provide advice and consent to executive branch nominees only if those nominees have been truthful in their dealings with Congress and the executive branch; (2) not vote on any nominee who has made verifiably false statements to Congress or the executive branch and who refuses to correct those statements; and (3) not vote on the nomination of Michael Pack to be Chief Executive Officer of the United States Agency for Global Media unless and until he corrects his statements to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and the Internal Revenue Service.
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
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.Res.604 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.Res.604 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.Res.604 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.Res.604 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.