PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 28, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on May 30, 2012. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Gauging American Port Security Act or the GAPS Act - Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) to: (1) conduct a study of gaps in U.S. port security and submit to Congress a report (in classified form but with an unclassified annex) that includes a prioritization of such gaps and a plan for addressing them; (2) share relevant information with designated points of contact from federal agencies, state, local, or tribal governments, and port system owners and operators in accordance with rules for the handling of classified information; and (3) help expedite the clearance process if a designated point of contact does not have the necessary security clearance to receive such information.
People & committees
Rep. Hahn, Janice [D-CA-36] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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): 411 - 9 (Roll no. 439). (text: CR 6/26/2012 H4009)
House roll call 439 · 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): 411 - 9 (Roll no. 439).(text: CR 6/26/2012 H4009)
House roll call 439 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4176-4177)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. King (NY) objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4005.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4009-4011)
Mr. King (NY) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 352.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 112-499.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 112-499.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
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.4005 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.4005 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.4005 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.4005 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.