PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 16, 2016
(Sec. 2) This bill requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to assess the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS's) study of the options for the disposition of Plum Island, New York. (In 2005, DHS announced that the operations of the Plum Island Animal Disease Center will move from Plum Island, New York, to a new federal facility in Manhattan, Kansas.)
The GAO must determine whether DHS's methodologies adequately support its findings with respect to:
the possible alternative uses for Plum Island, including the transfer to another federal agency, a state or local government, a nonprofit organization, or a combination of the entities for the purpose of education, research, or conservation;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
the issues and implications of the alternative uses; and
the cost for the transition, cleanup, and hazard mitigation by a recipient of the property.
If the DHS methodologies do not adequately support its findings related to an issue, the GAO must report to Congress on the issue.
(Sec. 3) The bill suspends until at least 180 days after the GAO submits its reports to Congress the requirement under current law for the General Services Administration to sell the property and assets which support Plum Island operations.
People & committees
Rep. Zeldin, Lee M. [R-NY-1] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Received in the Senate.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
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 H2406-2407)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H2406-2407)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1887.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2406-2409)
Mr. Ratcliffe moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 441.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 114-568.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 114-568.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies.
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: Apr 7, 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.1887 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.1887 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.1887 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.1887 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.