PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Apr 28, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Increased Capital Access for Growing Business Act - Amends the Investment Company Act of 1940 to include as an "eligible portfolio company," for purposes of eligibility for investment in small- and medium-sized businesses, an issuer of securities that: (1) does not have any class of equity securities listed for trading on a national securities exchange or traded through the facilities of a national securities association; or (2) has an aggregate value of outstanding publicly traded equity securities of not more than $250 million. Allows the Securities and Exchange Commission to adjust such amount consistent with the public interest, protection of investors, and the public purpose.
Includes as an eligible business development company, also for such purposes, an investment company: (1) without any such class of equity securities; or (2) that is not an eligible portfolio company because the aggregate value of its outstanding publicly traded equity securities is more than $250 million but not more than $500 million, as long as such securities represent no more than ten percent of the total invested assets of the company.
People & committees
Rep. Kelly, Sue W. [R-NY-19] · R–NY
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 Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
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. (text: CR H2423)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H2423)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3170.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2423-2424)
Mrs. Kelly moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial 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: 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.3170 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.3170 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.3170 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.3170 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.