PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1684-1685)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 17, 2005
Calls upon: (1) the Government of Cambodia to release Cheam Channy; (2) the Cambodian National Assembly to reverse its action to strip the immunity of opposition parliamentarians Sam Rainsy, Cheam Channy, and Chea Poch; (3) the Secretary of State to impose visa restrictions on Cambodian National Assembly members and their families who voted to strip the immunity of Sam Rainsy, Cheam Channy, and Chea Pok; and (4) Prime Minister Hun Sen and Cambodian National Assembly President Norodom Ranariddh to cease their efforts to undermine democracy and human rights in Cambodia.
Urges international condemnation of, and imposition of sanctions on, the Government of Cambodia until it reverses such actions.
People & committees
Sen. Brownback, Sam [R-KS] · R–KS
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 Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1684-1685)
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: Apr 7, 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.65 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.65 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.65 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.65 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.