PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 108-449.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Sep 4, 2003
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the Irish Peace Process Cultural and Training Program Act of 1998 (IPPCTPA) to limit the number of participants in the Irish Peace Process Cultural and Training Program who have a degree from an institution of higher education to no more than 20 percent.
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to revise the nonimmigrant alien eligibility qualifications for program participants. Sets a minimum age of 21 (retaining the current age 35 maximum), and requires that the individual has: (1) been unemployed for at least six months; and (2) has resided for at least six months in Northern Ireland or one of designated border counties of the Republic of Ireland. Reduces from 36 to 24 months the temporary period of the visit to the United States for participation in the program.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Denies any such person eligibility to apply for an immigrant visa, or for permanent residence, or for a nonimmigrant visa under such Act until he or she has resided and been physically present in the country of nationality or last residence for an aggregate of a least one year following departure from the United States. Authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive this requirement if: (1) departure from the United States would impose exceptional hardship upon the alien's spouse or child (if such spouse or child is a U.S. citizen or a lawfully resident alien); (2) the alien cannot return to the country of his or her nationality or last residence because he or she would be subject to persecution on account of race, religion, or political opinion; or (3) the admission of the alien is in the U.S. public or national interest.
Extends the authority of the IPPCTPA through FY 2008. Requires the Secretary to report each program year to Congress (currently, the third program year and the three subsequent years) on the number of aliens admitted who have overstayed their visas.
People & committees
Rep. Walsh, James T. [R-NY-25] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 108-449.
Became Public Law No: 108-449.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to without objection.
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to without objection.
Mr. Sensenbrenner asked unanimous consent that the House agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H10218; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H10218)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR 11/20/2004 S11661-11662)
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H9228)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9228)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2655.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9228-9231)
Mr. Sensenbrenner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 149.
Committee on International Relations discharged.
Committee on International Relations discharged.
House Committee on International Relations Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 4, 2003.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-260, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-260, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, 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 the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, 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 the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, 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.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.2655 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.2655 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.2655 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.2655 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.