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 · Jan 25, 2021
Halt Unchecked Member Benefits with Lobbying Elimination Act or the HUMBLE Act
This bill places limits on certain activities of Members and elected officers of Congress.
The bill imposes a permanent ban on lobbying contacts by a former Senator (currently, a two-year ban), a former Member of the House of Representatives (currently, a one-year ban), or a former elected officer of the House or Senate (currently, a one-year ban).
This bill prohibits federal funds made available for the official travel of a Member or other officer or employee of the legislative branch from being used for airline accommodations that are not coach-class accommodations.
Such prohibition is inapplicable for an individual if the use would be permitted for an employee of an agency subject to specified federal regulations for temporary duty travel allowances.
Certain benefits and services are eliminated for former Members of the House (e.g., access to the House chamber, the Member's Dining Room, or parking spaces) unless the benefits or services are made available to the public.
Finally, the bill prohibits Members of the House from owning the common stock of any individual corporation.
People & committees
Rep. Craig, Angie [D-MN-2] · D–MN
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 Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committees on Rules, Ethics, 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.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committees on Rules, Ethics, 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.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committees on Rules, Ethics, 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.
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committees on Rules, Ethics, 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.459 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.459 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.459 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.459 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.