PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 22, 1999
Realistic Tests for Realistic Threats National Security Act of 1999 - Requires the Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization of the Department of Defense to: (1) conduct, no later than September 30, 2001, at least one intercept test of the Navy Theater-Wide defense system and the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system against target missiles with velocities of not less than the maximum velocity of the Taepo Dong I missile of North Korea; (2) take immediate steps to modify plans for managing the development of such systems to meet such deadline. Urges the Director, in order to improve the likelihood that the tests are successful, to review changes in the configuration of the systems to: (1) increase the speed of their interceptor missiles to well in excess of three kilometers-per-second; and (2) allow such missiles to receive and use targeting data provided by a variety of external sensors.
People & committees
Rep. Vitter, David [R-LA-1] · R–LA
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 Military Research and Development.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
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: Aug 20, 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.2596 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.2596 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.2596 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.2596 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.