PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 23, 2010
Establishes a program under which the Architect of the Capitol shall solicit, accept, and place busts from each of the states for display in one of the Cannon, Rayburn, or Longworth House Office Buildings.
Considers such bust a gift to the United States.
Limits such bust to one per state on display.
Requires the House Committee on House Administration to specify standards which must be met by such state provided bust, including that: (1) it must portray a leading political, religious, or cultural figure from the state's history; (2) it must conform to roughly uniform dimensions; (3) its construction must be in either bronze or marble; (4) its style must be realistic; and (5) no bust representing any individual may be accepted for display as part of the program until 50 years after his or her death.
People & committees
Rep. Pitts, Joseph R. [R-PA-16] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
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: 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.4670 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.4670 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.4670 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.4670 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.