PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 30, 1993
Amends the Internal Revenue Code with respect to political organizations to establish a campaign contribution limitation scheme applicable to the campaign committee of a candidate for election to the House of Representatives. Provides that excess campaign contributions received by such an organization shall be included in its gross income. Amends the Communications Act of 1934 and Federal postal service law to condition the lowest unit charge for campaign ads upon a candidate's certification of compliance with such contribution limitation. Expresses the sense of the Congress that additional costs incurred by the United Postal Service in providing reduced rates of postage pursuant to this Act should be funded out of revenues attributable to this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Browder, Glen [D-AL-3] · D–AL
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 Telecommunications and Finance.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Referred to the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H7266)
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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.3192 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.3192 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.3192 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.3192 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.