PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 22, 2009
Amends the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 to make it unlawful for a person to knowingly commit specified fraudulent acts relating to a Pigford claim (relating to racial discrimination by the Department of Agriculture). Subjects a violator to criminal fine and/or up to five years in prison.
Provides for: (1) access to the permanent judgment fund for additional claims payments or debt relief after the expenditure of amounts otherwise made available for claims payments; and (2) reasonable attorney fees, administrative costs, and expenses to be paid from such fund.
People & committees
Rep. Davis, Artur [D-AL-7] · D–AL
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 the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Referred to House Agriculture
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, 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.
Referred to House Judiciary
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.3623 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.3623 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.3623 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.3623 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.