PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Dec 2, 2009
Amends the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) to direct the Secretary of the Treasury to: (1) establish an electronic database using data from specified sources to monitor the use of Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds by institutions receiving financial assistance or procurement contracts; and (2) make such database available to the Special Inspector General of TARP, the Comptroller General, and the Congressional Oversight Panel in order to provide them with access to current information on the status of funds distributed under TARP, including funds distributed through procurement contracts.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) collect from each federal agency any regulatory filings, internal models, financial models, and analytics associated with the financial assistance on at least a daily basis in order to determine the effectiveness of TARP in stimulating prudent lending and strengthening bank capital; and (2) compare the data in such database with any other data in order to identify activities inconsistent with TARP goals.
Requires the Secretary, if a recipient's use of TARP funds is not meeting TARP goals, to develop, in coordination with federal agencies, recommendations for better meeting such goals.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary, furthermore, to modify permitted uses of TARP funds if such goals are not met within a reasonable time after the recommendations are communicated.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) adopt rules and procedures for public access to the electronic database created by this Act; and (2) implement measures to protect confidential or proprietary information. Subjects intentional disclosure of such information to criminal penalties.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) issue a request for proposal and award contract services to implement this Act within 30 days after enactment; and (2) ensure that the electronic database is operational within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
Modifies the reduction of TARP funds to offset the costs of program changes.
People & committees
Rep. Maloney, Carolyn B. [D-NY-14] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Received in the Senate.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 421 - 0 (Roll no. 921). (text: CR H13405-13406)
House roll call 921 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 421 - 0 (Roll no. 921).(text: CR H13405-13406)
House roll call 921 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H13426-13427)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1242.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H13405-13408)
Mrs. Maloney moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
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.
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.1242 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.1242 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.1242 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.1242 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.