PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs referred to Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 17, 2006
National Capital Transportation Amendments Act of 2006 - Amends the National Capital Transportation Act of 1969 to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to provide additional funding through grants to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) to finance in part the capital and preventive maintenance projects included in the Capital Improvement Program. Sets forth certain limits on the use of such grants. Prohibits funding to WMATA until it notifies the Secretary that certain amendments to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Compact have taken effect.
Authorizes appropriations for such grants in an amount made available to the Secretary of the Treasury to make certain payments to the WMATA under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.
Establishes within WMATA the Office of Inspector General. Sets forth the duties of the Inspector General, including to investigate complaints of activities constituting violations of law, rules, or regulations, or mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to the public health and safety.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth certain prohibitions, conditions, and restrictions on the disposition or development of certain real properties by WMATA.
Requires the Comptroller General to study and report to Congress on the use of funds provided under this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Davis, Tom [R-VA-11] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs referred to Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
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): 242 - 120 (Roll no. 376). (text: CR H5234-5235)
House roll call 376 · 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): 242 - 120 (Roll no. 376).(text: CR H5234-5235)
House roll call 376 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5246)
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. 3496.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5234-5240)
Mr. Davis, Tom moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 245.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Government Reform. H. Rept. 109-440.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Government Reform. H. Rept. 109-440.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
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.3496 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.3496 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.3496 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.3496 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.