PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.3238 / 106th Congress

To name certain facilities of the United States Postal Service in Baltimore, Maryland.

Referred to the Subcommittee on Postal Service.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 5, 1999

Designates the U.S. post offices located in Baltimore, Maryland, at: (1) 919 West 34th Street as the Samuel H. Lacy, Sr. Post Office; (2) 3500 Dolfield Avenue as the Judge Robert Bernard Watts, Sr. Post Office; (3) 1908 North Ellamont Street as the Dr. Flossie McClain Dedmond Post Office; (4) 900 East Fayette Street as the Judge Harry Augustus Cole Post Office; and (5) 1001 Frederick Road as the Frederick L. Dewberry, Jr. Post Office.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Cummings, Elijah E. [D-MD-7] · D–MD

Committees

  • Oversight and Government Reform Committee
7 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Postal Service.

  2. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2293)

  3. Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.

  4. Introduced in House

  5. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Feb 4, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.3238 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.3238 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.3238 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.3238 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.

View full prompt & sources