PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.3621 / 107th Congress

Port Security and Terrorism Prevention Act

Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 23, 2002

Port Security and Terrorism Prevention Act - Amends the Ports and Waterways Safety Act to establish a National Maritime Security Advisory Committee to advise, consult with, and make recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation on ways to enhance the security and safety of U.S. ports, including matters related to maritime and port security and safety.Directs the Secretary to develop standards and procedures for conducting initial security evaluations and port vulnerability assessments.Requires the Secretary to carry out a demonstration project to assist the Port of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in the development of a security assessment methodology (SAM), and a training program to implement it, in order to assess the ability of a port to detect and prevent terrorist or criminal activity.Requires the establishment of local seaport security committees, among other things, to assist in the review of port vulnerability assessments and maritime security plans for each local port authority, waterfront facility operator, or operator of a public or commercial structure located within or adjacent to a marine environment.Sets forth requirements calling for: (1) the issuance of regulations establishing requirements for submission of maritime facility security plans that are adequate to safeguard the public and improve the response to threats of crime and terrorism, including designation of controlled access areas in maritime facility plans for waterfront facilities and restrictions limiting access to security-sensitive information; (2) screening of and background checks for persons having access to such areas and information; (3) enhanced maritime domain awareness; (4) an assessment of the effectiveness of security measures maintained at foreign ports that serve U.S. vessels, from which foreign vessels serve the United States, or that pose a high risk of danger to U.S. ports, U.S. citizens, U.S. vessels, or other U.S. interests; (4) dissemination of port security program information to port authorities and marine terminal operators in other countries, including the development of measures to protect the security of U.S. ports from risks related to vessels that arrive from foreign ports that do not maintain an acceptable level of security; (5) the development of maritime security professional training standards (including the establishment of a Maritime Security Institute in Louisiana); (6) the provision of grants to public and private entities for certain construction or acquisition of security infrastructure projects; and (7) other specified maritime safety and security related measures, including penalties for the destruction of or interference with vessels or maritime facilities.

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. Vitter, David [R-LA-1] · R–LA

Committees

  • Judiciary Committee
  • Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
  • Ways and Means Committee
0 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 Crime.

    2. Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.

    3. Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

    4. Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

    5. Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

    6. Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

    7. Introduced in House

    8. 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: Aug 19, 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.3621 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.3621 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.3621 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.3621 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