PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.1587 / 105th Congress

Airline Passenger Safety Act of 1997

Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 13, 1997

Airline Passenger Safety Act of 1997 - Amends Federal aviation law to prohibit chemical oxygen generators from being transported as cargo on any passenger or cargo aircraft, regardless of whether the generator has been discharged. Sets forth smoke or fire detector system and fire extinguishing system requirements for air cargo compartment transportation of oxidizers and oxidizing materials (other than chemical oxygen generators). Directs the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to modify existing regulations for aircraft airworthiness standards to require that each Class D cargo or baggage compartment be equipped with a separately approved smoke or fire detector and a separately approved built-in fire extinguishing system meeting certain criteria. Requires the Administrator to: (1) evaluate the practices of, and training provided by, all air carriers for accepting passenger baggage and freight shipments and for identifying undeclared or unauthorized hazardous materials; and (2) require all air carriers to revise, as necessary, their practices and training on the basis of such evaluation.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Rush, Bobby L. [D-IL-1] · D–IL

Committees

  • Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.

    2. Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

    3. Introduced in House

    4. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

    Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze H.R.1587 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine H.R.1587 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine H.R.1587 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine H.R.1587 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.

    View full prompt & sources