PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 3, 1999
Rail Passenger Disaster Family Assistance Act of 1999 - Amends Federal transportation law to require the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, as soon as practicable after being notified of a rail passenger accident involving a major loss of life, to: (1) designate and publicize the name and phone number of a Board employee who shall be a director of family support services responsible for acting as a point of contact within the Federal Government for the families of passengers involved in a rail passenger accident and a liaison between the rail passenger carrier and the families; and (2) designate an independent nonprofit organization (with experience in disasters and posttrauma communication with families) which shall have primary responsibility for coordinating the emotional care and support of the families of passengers involved in such accidents. Sets forth the responsibilities of the Board and designated organization.Directs each rail passenger carrier to submit to the Secretary of Transportation and the Chairman of the Board a plan for addressing the needs of the families of passengers involved in a rail passenger accident resulting in a major loss of life. Shields a rail passenger carrier from liability for damages (except for gross negligence or intentional misconduct) in any action brought in a Federal or State court arising out of the carrier's performance in preparing or providing a passenger list, or in providing information concerning a train reservation, pursuant to the carrier's plan.
People & committees
Rep. Shuster, Bud [R-PA-9] · R–PA
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 Commerce.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2681.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9249-9251)
Mr. Petri moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 188.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 106-313.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 106-313.
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 Ground Transportation.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.2681 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.2681 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.2681 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.2681 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.