PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Total Force.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 24, 2003
Amends the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 to provide for the awarding of the Purple Heart to members held as prisoners of war before April 25, 1962, who were wounded while in captivity or who, while in captivity, were subjected to deprivation of food and medical treatment and to other forms of mistreatment. Requires the Secretary of the military department concerned to inform the former prisoner that historical information about the prison camp and other appropriate circumstances may be considered by the Secretary in evaluating an application for award of the Purple Heart and that the former prisoner may submit such information. Directs such Secretary to take into account the length of time that the award applicant was held in captivity to help determine whether the former prisoner was likely to have been wounded, starved, or denied medical treatment.
People & committees
Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3] · R–NC
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 Total Force.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1613-1614)
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: Jun 6, 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.2875 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.2875 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.2875 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.2875 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.