PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Resolution agreed to in Senate with an amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6531-6532; text: CR S6531)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 21, 2001
Condemns the brutal murder of Carlos Caceres, a U.S. citizen, in West Timor. Decries the inadequate sentences given by the Indonesian judicial system to the killers of Caceres and two other United Nations aid workers.Calls on the Indonesian Government to indict and bring to trial the senior military commanders described in a September 1, 2000, statement by that Government as suspects in the mass killings following the August 1999 East Timor referendum.Calls for the President: (1) at every appropriate meeting with officials of the Indonesian Government, to stress the importance of ending the climate of impunity which shields those individuals suspected of perpetrating, collaborating in, or covering up extrajudicial killings, torture, and other human rights abuses, especially senior members of the Indonesian military; and (2) to consider the willingness of such Government to make rapid and substantive progress in judicial reform when determining the level of financial support provided by the United States to Indonesia.
People & committees
Sen. Nelson, Bill [D-FL] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Resolution agreed to in Senate with an amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6531-6532; text: CR S6531)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate with an amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6531-6532; text: CR S6531)
Star Print ordered on resolution, as reported.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 67.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Helms with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and with an amended preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Helms with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and with an amended preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5278)
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.91 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.91 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.91 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.91 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.