PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 15, 2011
Vieques Recovery and Development Act of 2011 - Directs the President to acquire or convert real property located within the Municipality of Vieques, Puerto Rico, for the purpose of constructing: (1) a specialty hospital that provides treatment for the sick and injured; and (2) a toxins research center that studies the existence, prevalence, and impact of toxins in Vieques, provides recommendations regarding the prevention of exposure to harmful levels of such toxins, and shares findings with medical personnel at such hospital.
Requires the President to: (1) operate and maintain the quality of the hospital and research center; (2) develop an interagency plan to ensure that such residents benefit from improved access to federal programs, federal discretionary funding sources, and federal agency technical assistance; and (3) appoint a federal ombudsman for Vieques, who shall monitor the development and implementation of such plan.
Prohibits the President from carrying out this Act until the administrative claims filed on May 18, 2009, by the Mayor of Vieques for money damages against the Department of the Navy have been settled or compromised.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes a $10,000 award for settlement of any personal injury claim filed before enactment of this Act by an individual who was a resident of Vieques during or after the Navy's use of chemical weapons, toxic chemicals, and heavy metals for military training operations on the island, including for illness or death arising from such use. Increases awards for individuals who submit medical documentation of contracting a disease that is life-threatening, chronic, or related to heavy metals toxicity. Deems any award payment to be full settlement of the claim and a complete release by the individual of such claim against the United States or its employees.
People & committees
Rep. Rothman, Steven R. [D-NJ-9] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Aug 14, 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.1645 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.1645 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.1645 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.1645 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.