PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Jul 25, 1996
False Statements Penalty Restoration Act - Amends the Federal criminal code to make provisions prohibiting anyone from knowingly and willfully making misrepresentations to the Government applicable to the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, except with respect to statements, representations, or documents submitted to a judge by a party or counsel in a judicial proceeding. Defines "corruptly," for purposes of the prohibition on obstructing proceedings before a Federal agency or the Congress, to mean acting with an improper purpose, personally or by influencing another, including making a false or misleading statement, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information. Amends the Federal judicial code to limit the exemption of a Government officer or employee acting within an official capacity from U.S. district court jurisdiction to enforce a Senate subpoena or order to executive branch officers or employees refusing to comply based on a governmental privilege or objection authorized by the executive branch and not on a personal privilege or objection. Amends the Federal criminal code to authorize a U.S. district court to order an individual to provide information which he or she refuses to provide on the basis of the privilege against self-incrimination in proceedings ancillary to either House of Congress. (Currently, such authority applies only to proceedings before either House.)
People & committees
Rep. Martini, William J. [R-NJ-8] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 104-292.
Became Public Law No: 104-292.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Senate agreed House amendment to the Senate amendments by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11605-11609)
Resolving differences -- Senate actions: Senate agreed House amendment to the Senate amendments by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11605-11609)
Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendment to Senate amendments.
House agreed to Senate amendments with amendment pursuant to H. Res. 535. (consideration: CR H11246)
Resolving differences -- House actions: House agreed to Senate amendments with amendment pursuant to H. Res. 535.(consideration: CR H11246)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 5091 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 5091 proposed by Senator Murkowski for Senator Specter.
Measure laid before Senate.
Senate Committee on Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8938-8941)
Senate Committee on Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S8938-8941)
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
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 recorded vote (2/3 required): 417 - 6 (Roll No. 324).
House roll call 324 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 417 - 6 (Roll No. 324).
House roll call 324 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7714-7715)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. McCollum objected to the Yea - Nay vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7540-7544)
Mr. McCollum moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 351.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 104-680.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 104-680.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) 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 Crime.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.3166 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.3166 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.3166 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.3166 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.