PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from DOD.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 9, 1997
Directs the Secretary of the military department concerned to issue a nuclear radiation medal to any person who, as a member of the armed forces, participated in a radiation-risk activity while serving on active duty or while performing active duty for training or inactive duty training. Includes as a radiation-risk activity: (1) the on-site participation in a test involving the atmospheric detonation of a nuclear device; (2) the occupation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, during a specified period during World War II; (3) internment as a prisoner of war in Japan during World War II that resulted in an opportunity for exposure to ionizing radiation; and (4) any other activity that resulted in such exposure, as determined by such Secretary.
People & committees
Rep. Richardson, Bill [D-NM-3] · D–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from DOD.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Referred to the House Committee on National Security.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E74)
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: Jun 6, 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.432 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.432 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.432 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.432 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.