PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Finance and Hazardous Materials.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 26, 1997
Amends the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 to repeal the termination (thus, provide for the revival) of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Ombudsman. Requires the Office (within the EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response) to report to the Congress on the status of health and environmental concerns addressed by Ombudsman cases. Directs EPA to facilitate structuring the Office consistent with the American Bar Association's Model Ombudsman Statute.
People & committees
Rep. Talent, Jim [R-MO-2] · R–MO
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 Finance and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the House Committee on Commerce.
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: Feb 5, 2024. 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.2102 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.2102 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.2102 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.2102 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.