PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 6, 1999
Year 2000 Consumer Protection Plan Act of 1999 - Sets forth provisions to govern civil actions, whether arising under Federal or State law, except for actions brought by a Federal, State, or other public entity, agency, or authority acting in a regulatory, supervisory, or enforcement capacity, seeking damages caused by a year 2000 processing failure, disruption, or error (failure) and any arbitration or mediation proceedings brought as a result of the initiation of such action. Directs the clerk of the court, when a person files a complaint seeking such damages, to refer the complaint to a mandatory arbitration proceeding. Allows a person to recover damages upon a showing by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) the failure caused a foreseeable loss; (2) the defendant's action or inaction as an end user (i.e., a party in possession of and using software or hardware) was unreasonable under the circumstances; and (3) the loss was proximately caused by the defendant. Makes a director or officer of a corporation which is a defendant in such an action responsible only for failure to exercise due diligence in overseeing the direction of an act cited by the plaintiff in making such showing. Authorizes damage awards in such actions for personal injury, wrongful death, property damage, and punitive damages. Sets a statute of limitations of two years after January 1, 2000. Directs that any class action brought for damages for a failure which is governed by this Act or State law be brought in the district court for the district in which the failure occurred. Makes this Act inapplicable to any action arising out of an express written contract between the parties.
People & committees
Rep. Manzullo, Donald A. [R-IL-16] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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 20, 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.192 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.192 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.192 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.192 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.