PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S3438-3439)
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Apr 11, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Designates the week of April 17, 2005, as the National Week of Hope, commemorating the tenth anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. Calls on the people of the United States to participate in the events scheduled for each day of that week, including the Day of Faith, the Day of Understanding, the Day of Remembrance, the Day of Sharing, the Day of Tolerance, the Day of Caring, and the Day of Inspiration.
.
People & committees
Sen. Inhofe, James M. [R-OK] · R–OK
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 without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S3438-3439)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S3438-3439)
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3438-3439)
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S3438-3439)
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3221)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3221)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. 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.96 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.96 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.96 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.96 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.