PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.See H.R.4110.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 18, 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Enhanced-Use Leases of Department of Veterans Affairs Real Property Title II: Renaming Provisions Title III: Codification of Prior Compensation Rate Increases Title I: Enhanced-Use Leases of Department of Veterans Affairs Real Property - Extends through December 31, 2002, the authority of the Department of Veterans Affairs to enter into enhanced-use leases of Department real property. Repeals a provision limiting the number of enhanced-use agreements in toto and during a fiscal year. Title II: Renaming Provisions - Renames the: (1) United States Court of Veterans Appeals as the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; (2) National Cemetery System of the Department as the National Cemetery Administration; and (3) position of Director of the National Cemetery System as the Assistant Secretary of Veterans Affairs for Memorial Affairs. Provides for the initial appointment of such Assistant Secretary. Title III: Codification of Prior Compensation Rate Increases - Codifies increases in the rates of: (1) veterans' disability compensation; (2) additional compensation for dependents; (3) the clothing allowance for certain disabled veterans; (4) dependency and indemnity compensation (DIC) for surviving spouses and children; and (5) supplemental DIC for disabled adult children.
People & committees
Rep. Stump, Bob [R-AZ-3] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
See H.R.4110.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1568-1571)
Mr. Stump moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 33.
Reported by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H. Rept. 105-47.
Reported by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H. Rept. 105-47.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
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 H.R.1092 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.1092 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.1092 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.1092 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.