PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 16, 2001
Appalachian Regional Development Reauthorization Act of 2001 - Amends the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 (the Act) to direct the President to establish the Interagency Coordinating Council on Appalachia.Authorizes the Appalachian Regional Commission to provide technical assistance and make grants, enter into contracts, and otherwise provide funds to: (1) increase affordable access to advanced telecommunications in the region; (2) provide education and training for people, businesses, and governments in the region in the use of telecommunications technology; (3) develop relevant technology readiness programs for industry groups and businesses in the region; and (4) support entrepreneurial opportunities in information technology in the region.Eliminates the growth center criteria with respect to factors in considering programs and projects to be given assistance under the Act. Directs that, for each fiscal year, at least half of the amount of grant expenditures approved by the Commission support activities or projects that benefit counties for which distressed county designations are in effect.Modifies Act provisions to direct that not more than 75 percent, for a development district that includes one or more counties for which a distressed county designation is in effect, of the costs of any activity eligible for financial assistance be provided from funds appropriated to carry out the Act.Adds Edmonson, Hart, and Metcalfe ( Kentucky), and Grenada, Montgomery, and Panola (in Mississippi), to the counties included in the Appalachian region.Reauthorizes appropriations and extends the Act until October 1, 2006.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H5319-5321; text of measure as introduced: CR H5319-5320)
Mr. LaTourette asked unanimous consent to discharge the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and consider.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 107.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 107-180.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 107-180.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
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.
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.2501 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.2501 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.2501 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.2501 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.