PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 112-170.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Aug 16, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on July 26, 2012. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Makes funds appropriated to the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) for the Capitol power plant in any fiscal year available to construct, operate, and maintain on a reimbursable basis battery recharging stations in parking areas under the jurisdiction of the House of Representatives on Capitol grounds for use by privately owned vehicles used by: (1) Members of the House, or (2) employees whose pay is disbursed by the Chief Administrative Officer of the House or any other individuals authorized to park in any parking area under House jurisdiction on Capitol grounds (covered employees).
Requires the Architect to charge Members and covered employees fees for the electricity sufficient to cover costs, including those to any vendors or other costs associated with maintaining the battery recharging stations.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the AOC to report triennially to the Committee on House Administration on whether or not individuals using the battery charging stations receive a subsidy from the taxpayers, and, if so, to submit a plan to the Committee to update the program to ensure that no subsidy is being received.
Requires the AOC, if the Committee fails to act on the plan within 60 days, to take appropriate steps to increase rates or fees to ensure reimbursement for the cost of the program.
People & committees
Rep. Kildee, Dale E. [D-MI-5] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-170.
Became Public Law No: 112-170.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6007)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6007)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H5650; text of measure as reported in House: CR H5650)
Mr. Lungren, Daniel E. asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and consider.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 449.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 112-625.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 112-625.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 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.1402 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.1402 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.1402 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.1402 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.