Supercomputer Post-shipment Verification Act of 1999
Referred to the Subcommittee on International Economic Policy and Trade.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 26, 1999
Supercomputer Post-shipment Verification Act of 1999 - Prohibits the export or reexport of digital computers with a composite theoretical performance of more than 2,000 MTOPS to a country that has been a recipient of such exports for which post-shipment verifications have not been made during the period beginning on November 18, 1997, and ending September 30, 1998. Prohibits the subsequent export or reexport of such computers to such country until all post-shipment verifications have been made. Requires the Secretary of Commerce to report annually to specified congressional committees on the results of post-shipment verifications during the previous fiscal year. Directs the Secretary of Defense to report to specified congressional committees on the impact on national security of the export of such computers to countries listed as "Computer Tier 3" eligible under section 740.7 of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on International Economic Policy and Trade.
Referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.1962 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.1962 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.1962 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.1962 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.