PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-214.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 10, 1999
Authorizes the American Battle Monuments Commission to place within the Vietnam Veterans Memorial a plaque to honor those Vietnam veterans who died after service in the Vietnam War, but as a direct result of such service, and whose names are not otherwise eligible for placement on the Memorial wall.
People & committees
Rep. Gallegly, Elton [R-CA-23] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-214.
Became Public Law No: 106-214.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S4501)
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S4501)
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 421 - 0 (Roll no. 150). (text: CR H2663)
House roll call 150 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 421 - 0 (Roll no. 150).(text: CR H2663)
House roll call 150 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2734-2735)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3293.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2663-2667)
Mr. Gallegly moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 319.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-585.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-585.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2366)
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
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: Sep 8, 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.3293 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.3293 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.3293 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.3293 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.