PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 6, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on October 5, 2004. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Technical Corrections Act of 1994 to reauthorize for a period of two years the Conrad State 30 program, which annually allows each State to request up to 30 waivers of the home residency requirement applicable to J-1 foreign medical graduates for medical service in health professional shortage areas.
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to exempt Conrad State 30 physicians from the numerical limitation on H-1B visas.
Limits to primary care or specialty medicine the medical practice areas available to Conrad State 30 physicians.
Allows Conrad State 30 physicians to practice medicine outside geographic areas designated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in the case of a waiver request from an interested State agency where the facility serves patients residing in such areas and granting the requested waiver would not cause the number of waivers for the State to exceed five in a fiscal year.
People & committees
Rep. Moran, Jerry [R-KS-1] · R–KS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H8237)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H8237)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4453.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8237-8239)
Mr. Sensenbrenner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 450.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-730.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-730.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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 18, 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.4453 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.4453 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.4453 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.4453 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.