H. Con. Res. 30 (111th)Bill Overview

Urge Return of Balangiga Bells to Philippines

Concurrent ResolutionInternational Affairs|AsiaConflicts and wars
Cosponsors
Support
Democratic
Introduced
Jan 28, 2009
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Concurrent ResolutionWhat this resolution actually does

This resolution urges the President to authorize returning two church bells taken in 1901 from Balangiga, Philippines, to the people of the Philippines. It is a concurrent resolution expressing Congress's view and asking the executive branch to act; it does not create binding law or itself order the return. If both chambers adopt it, it signals congressional support but the decision and execution remain with the President and federal agencies.

Passage rules

Concurrent resolutions must be approved by both the House and the Senate but are not sent to the President and do not have the force of law; they express Congress's position or make requests rather than creating binding legal obligations.

This concurrent resolution urges the President to authorize returning two church bells taken by the U.S. Army in 1901 from Balangiga, Samar, Philippines, which are currently displayed at F.E. Warren Air Force Base.

The text frames the bells as a symbol of friendship and goodwill, notes Filipino requests for their return, and acknowledges the United States holds legal title and final disposition over the bells.

The resolution is non-binding and asks executive action to transfer the bells back to the people of the Philippines.

Passage45/100

A narrow, nonbinding goodwill measure has reasonable chance of congressional approval but could be stalled by constituency opposition or procedural hurdles; executive action still required.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill functions primarily as a symbolic congressional expression urging executive action and is well-defined in purpose but contains minimal operational, legal-implementation, fiscal, or oversight detail.

Contention45/100

Liberal emphasizes restitution and reconciliation symbolism

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Communities · Local governmentsVeterans

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitMay improve diplomatic goodwill and strengthen bilateral US–Philippines relations.
  • CommunitiesCould provide cultural reconciliation and symbolic closure for the Balangiga community.
  • Local governmentsMight increase heritage tourism and related local economic activity in Balangiga.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenCould prompt additional repatriation demands for artifacts held by U.S. institutions.
  • VeteransMay provoke opposition from veterans, Wyoming stakeholders, or communities losing displayed artifacts.
  • Potential burdenWould carry administrative, security, transportation, and restoration costs for transfer and care.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Liberal emphasizes restitution and reconciliation symbolism
Progressive90%

Likely strongly supportive as a gesture of historical justice and reconciliation.

Views the return as low-cost diplomacy that repairs a colonial-era grievance and strengthens ties with the Philippines.

Leans supportive
Centrist75%

Generally supportive as pragmatic, symbolic diplomacy with modest costs.

Sees merit if legal/title issues are resolved and veterans’ concerns addressed; wants a careful, consultative process.

Leans supportive
Conservative35%

Skeptical or cautious; many would worry about setting a precedent and about honoring military history.

Some conservatives might accept return for diplomatic reasons, but with strong conditions protecting veterans' legacy.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood45/100

A narrow, nonbinding goodwill measure has reasonable chance of congressional approval but could be stalled by constituency opposition or procedural hurdles; executive action still required.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Executive willingness to act despite urging
  • Strength of local or veterans opposition in Wyoming
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Liberal emphasizes restitution and reconciliation symbolism

A narrow, nonbinding goodwill measure has reasonable chance of congressional approval but could be stalled by constituency opposition or pr…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill functions primarily as a symbolic congressional expression urging executive action and is well-defined in purpose but contains minimal operational, legal-implementati…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis