H.Con.Res. 165: Expressing the sense of Congress and reaffirming longstanding United States policy in support of a direct bilaterally negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and opposition to United Nations Security Council resolutions imposing a solution to the conflict.

H.Con.Res. 165: Expressing the sense of Congress and reaffirming longstanding United States policy in support of a direct bilaterally negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and opposition to United Nations Security Council resolutions imposing a solution to the conflict.

114th Congress · introduced 2016-09-28 · International Affairs · Latest: Received in the Senate.

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

Where it came from: introduced 2016-09-28 · official record
Who proposed it: Rep. Royce, Edward R. [R-CA-39] · what a sponsor is
What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
Where it stands now: Received in the Senate. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

Expressing the sense of Congress and reaffirming longstanding United States policy in support of a direct bilaterally negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and opposition to United Nations Security Council resolutions imposing a solution to the conflict.

Plain summary

(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.) Expresses the sense of Congress that: a sustainable peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians will come only through direct bilateral negotiations between the parties; any widespread international recognition of a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood outside of the context of such a peace agreement would cause severe harm to the peace process and would likely trigger the implementation of penalties under provisions of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 regarding limitations on assistance to support a Palestinian state and uses of funds for assistance for the West Bank and Gaza; efforts by outside bodies, including the United Nations Security Council, to impose an agreement are likely to set back the cause of peace; and the U.S. government should continue to oppose and veto Security Council resolutions that seek to impose solutions to final status issues or that are one-sided and anti-Israel, and should continue to support and facilitate the resumption of negotiations without preconditions toward a sustainable peace agreement.

Congressional Research Service summary (Passed House without amendment), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

A Yea supports adopting this resolution.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

Expressing the sense of Congress and reaffirming longstanding United States policy in support of a direct bilaterally negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and opposition to United Nations Security Council resolutions imposing a solution to the conflict.

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Passed House without amendment)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Rep. Royce, Edward R. [R-CA-39] · 17 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

Cosponsors on this site

Grace Meng (D-NY), Richard Hudson (R-NC), J. French Hill (R-AR), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL), Seth Moulton (D-MA)

No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.

Words on this page, explained (5)

Appropriation: Money a legislature sets aside by law for a specific purpose. Government agencies may spend public money only as it has been appropriated.
Resolution: A formal statement or decision by a legislative body. Simple resolutions often only express an opinion or set rules for one chamber; they do not become law.
Roll-call vote: A vote where each member's position is recorded by name, so the public can see how every member voted. "Yea" means yes, "Nay" means no, "Present" means the member was there but did not take a side.
Securities: Financial investments that can be bought and sold, such as stocks and bonds.
Veto: The power of a president or governor to reject a bill passed by the legislature. Lawmakers can override a veto with a large enough vote (two-thirds of each chamber in Congress).

Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.

Sources

Congressional Research Service summary (Passed House without amendment)
Congress.gov
Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-114hconres165.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/114/hconres>

Record fed-us-cong114-hconres165 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong114 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong114