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 S3088-3090; text as passed Senate: CR S3088-3090; text of measure as introduced: CR S3070-3072)
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Mar 17, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Supports the U.S. embargo on the People's Republic of China (PRC).
Urges the European Union (EU) to: (1) continue its ban on all arms exports to the PRC; (2) make its Code of Conduct on Arms Exports legally enforceable in all EU states; (3) more carefully regulate the end-use of military and dual-use technology; and (4) increase transparency in its arms and dual-use export control regimes.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Encourages the U.S. Government to make clear that a lifting of such EU arms embargo would potentially adversely affect transatlantic defense cooperation, including future transfers of U.S. military technology, services, and equipment to EU countries.
Deplores the ongoing human rights abuses in the PRC.
Urges the United States and the EU to develop a common strategy to seek: (1) human rights improvement in the PRC; (2) an end to the PRC's military build-up aimed at Taiwan; (3) improvement in the PRC's export control practices; (4) an end to the proliferation by state-sponsored entities in the PRC of technology related to weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles; and (5) an end to the proliferation by state and non-state owned entities and individuals in the PRC of military equipment involving countries, such as Burma and Sudan, whose armies have played a role in human rights violations against members of ethnic and religious minorities.
People & committees
Sen. Smith, Gordon H. [R-OR] · R–OR
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 S3088-3090; text as passed Senate: CR S3088-3090; text of measure as introduced: CR S3070-3072)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S3088-3090; text as passed Senate: CR S3088-3090; text of measure as introduced: CR S3070-3072)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.