PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 28, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House reported version is repeated here.)
Aviation Security Stakeholder Participation Act of 2012 - Directs the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration [TSA]) to establish in the TSA an Aviation Security Advisory Committee.
Requires the Assistant Secretary to consult with the Advisory Committee on aviation security matters.
Requires the Advisory Committee to develop, upon the Assistant Secretary's request, recommendations to improve aviation security.
Requires the Assistant Secretary to appoint to the Advisory Committee members representing up to 27 member organizations, including air carriers, all cargo air transportation, indirect air carriers, labor organizations representing air carrier employees, aircraft manufacturers, airport operators, general aviation, privacy, the travel industry, and the aviation technology security industry, including biometrics. Establishes within the Advisory Committee: (1) an air cargo security working group, (2) a general aviation working group, and (3) an airport perimeter security working group.
People & committees
Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2] · D–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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 voice vote. (text: CR 6/26/2012 H4011-4012)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 6/26/2012 H4011-4012)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4421)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. King (NY) objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1447.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4011-4014)
Mr. King (NY) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 180.
Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 112-269.
Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 112-269.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Transportation Security Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.1447 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.1447 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.1447 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.1447 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.