PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 21, 1995
Private Security Officer Quality Assurance Act of 1995 - Authorizes an association of employers of private security officers (officers) to submit fingerprints or other methods of positive identification to the Attorney General for background checks of such officers. Allows the Attorney General to exchange identification and criminal history records with State governmental agencies for licensing and employment purposes. (Sec. 4) Expresses the sense of the Congress that the States should enact statutes for issuing licenses to, and reviewing security services of, employers of officers. Provides that: (1) fees on licenses of officers should compensate the State for its direct costs of implementing and enforcing the program; and (2) procedures for issuing such licenses and reviewing such security services should require employers to assign an employee to duty as an unarmed officer prior to State approval of the employee's registration as an officer only after the employer has submitted an application for a criminal records background check, initiated verification of the employee's personal references and five year employment history, and verified that the employee has successfully completed specified training requirements. Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) registration permit and training requirements; (2) waiver of preassignment screening and training requirements if the officer holds a valid registration certificate of that State or is a sworn law enforcement officer; (3) recognition of out-of-State licenses; (4) employee protection from unreasonable limitations imposed by an employer on the right to seek or obtain subsequent employment; and (5) State use of advisory boards.
People & committees
Rep. Barr, Bob [R-GA-7] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 415 - 6 (Roll no. 437).
House roll call 437 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 415 - 6 (Roll no. 437).
House roll call 437 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H11245-11246)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed until Sept. 26.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11135-11137)
Mr. Barr moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 104-827, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 104-827, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Referred to the Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 Economic and Educational Opportunities, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 Economic and Educational Opportunities, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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
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: Mar 23, 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.2092 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.2092 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.2092 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.2092 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.