PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 2, 2005
True American Heroes Act of 2005 - Directs the Speaker of the House and the President pro tempore of the Senate to make arrangements for the presentation on behalf of the Congress of a single gold medal on the 5th anniversary of September 11, 2001, in the name of the unknown officer, worker, employee, passenger, or crew member, who was the first to die that day: (1) in the attack on the World Trade Center in New York City; (2) on board United Airlines Flight 93; and (3) in the attack on the Pentagon, Washington, D.C.
Requires such presentation to be made to an appropriate representative of all such officers, emergency workers, employees, and other individuals for permanent public display in the Smithsonian Institution.
Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to strike additional duplicates in silver of such gold medal for permanent public display at: (1) a memorial at the site of the World Trade Center attacks; (2) the crash site of United Airlines Flight 93 near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, and (3) a memorial at the site of the Pentagon attack.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Lists sites for permanent display of silver duplicates presented on behalf of responders, resistors aboard Flight 93, and Government workers who responded to and perished in the Pentagon attack.
Instructs the Secretary to mint and issue $50 gold coins, $1 silver coins; and half dollar clad coins in commemoration of the Spirit of America.
Directs the Secretary to mint and issue $50 gold coins equal to the number of innocent individuals confirmed or presumed to have been killed as a result of the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001.
States that the design of such coins shall be emblematic of the tragic events that occurred at the Pentagon, in New York City, and in Pennsylvania, on September 11, 2001.
Sets forth surcharges on the sale of such coins.
People & committees
Rep. King, Peter T. [R-NY-3] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
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: Aug 15, 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 H.R.1057 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 H.R.1057 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 H.R.1057 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 H.R.1057 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.