PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 8, 1995
Amends the Expedited Funds Availability Act to redefine the term "receiving depository institution" to mean a branch of a depository institution or the proprietary ATM located in the United States in which a check is first deposited. Amends the Act to include Guam and American Samoa within the meaning of "State" and "United States." Extends by two additional business days the current requirement that certain funds be available for withdrawal not later than one business day after receipt for deposit, if the deposit was made: (1) in an account at a depository institution located in Guam or American Samoa; and (2) by a check drawn on a originating depository institution which is not located in the same State as the receiving depository institution.
People & committees
Del. Faleomavaega, Eni F. H. [D-AS-At Large] · D–AS
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 Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.
Referred to the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H5738)
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: Feb 6, 2024. 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.1800 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.1800 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.1800 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.1800 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.