PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 14, 2005
Due Process and Economic Competitiveness Restoration Act - Amends the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to repeal the requirement that an issuer's annual report to shareholders must: (1) state the responsibility of management for establishing and maintaining an adequate internal control structure and procedure for financial reporting; and (2) contain an assessment of the effectiveness of such internal control.
Repeals the requirement that each registered public accounting firm that prepares or issues the audit report for such issuer must attest to, and report on, the assessment made by the management of the issuer.
People & committees
Rep. Paul, Ron [R-TX-14] · R–TX
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 Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E657-658)
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E653)
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 15, 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.1657 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.1657 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.1657 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.1657 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.