PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Technology, Environment and Aviation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 18, 1993
Environmental Excellence Recognition Act of 1993 - Amends the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 to establish the President's Total Environmental Quality Award. Requires the Secretary of Commerce to establish a process for the acceptance and evaluation of Award applicants using, to the extent practicable, the same procedures and facilities provided for the Malcolm Baldrige Award. Directs the President, based on the Secretary's recommendations, to periodically select companies and other organizations which have benefited the United States through the development and deployment of environmental technologies for receipt of the Award. Establishes a National Environmentally Sound Technology Award for individuals who have pioneered the development and use of a highly innovative environmental technology. Directs the Secretary to receive and evaluate applications for, and provide for presentation of, the Award. Makes U.S. citizens or permanent residents eligible for the Award. Permits up to five of such Awards to be presented annually.
People & committees
Rep. Swett, Dick [D-NH-2] · D–NH
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 Technology, Environment and Aviation.
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
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: Aug 26, 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.3529 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.3529 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.3529 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.3529 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.