PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 108-376.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 7, 2003
Amends Federal law to require a plurality (currently, a majority) of votes in elections for the Delegate representing American Samoa in the United States House of Representatives. Eliminates the requirement for runoff elections. Authorizes the legislature of American Samoa, if it provides for primary elections for the election of the Delegate, also to provide that the Delegate shall be elected by a majority of the votes cast in any general election for the office of Delegate for which such primary elections were held.
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.
Became Public Law No: 108-376.
Became Public Law No: 108-376.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11127-11183; text as passed Senate: CR S11180)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11127-11183; text as passed Senate: CR S11180)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 736.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici without amendment. With written report No. 108-377.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici without amendment. With written report No. 108-377.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 H3881-3882)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H3881-3882)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2010.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3881-3884)
Mr. Renzi moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 295.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-515.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-515.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Hearings Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
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: 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.2010 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.2010 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.2010 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.2010 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.