PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Sep 25, 2013
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends federal shipping law to extend through October 31, 2028, the exemption of certain vessels from the requirement that U.S. passenger vessels having berth or stateroom accommodations for at least 50 passengers be constructed of fire-retardant materials in order to be granted a certificate of inspection.
Continues to apply this exemption only to vessels in operation before January 1, 1968, which operate only within the Boundary Line (the dividing point between inland waters and high seas).
People & committees
Rep. Chabot, Steve [R-OH-1] · R–OH
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 Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Received in the Senate.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 280 - 89 (Roll no. 484). (text: CR H5810)
House roll call 484 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 280 - 89 (Roll no. 484).(text: CR H5810)
House roll call 484 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5823-5824)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House resumed debate on H.R. 1961.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1961.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5810-5815)
Mr. Petri moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 127.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 113-175.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 113-175.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.1961 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.1961 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.1961 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.1961 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.