PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 8, 1999
Amends Federal aviation law to require the Secretary of Transportation to investigate and hold a public hearing with respect to each petition by the sponsor of a commercial service airport (or by the attorney general of a State on behalf of one or more persons, including governmental entities, with respect to an airport) claiming that fares for air transportation at an airport are unreasonably high, or that competition between air carriers at the airport is inadequate. Directs the Secretary to: (1) issue written findings in response to the issues raised in the petition; and (2) report to Congress the results of the investigations, if any. Directs the Secretary to review the marketing practices of air carriers that may inhibit the availability of quality, affordable air transportation services to commercial service airports. Requires the Secretary, if it is determined that one or more marketing practices of air carriers inhibit such services, to issue regulations addressing such practices.
People & committees
Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.2051 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.2051 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.2051 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.2051 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.