PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 24, 2021
Stopping Terrorist Minerals Trade Act
This bill requires the President to prohibit the importation into or transit through the United States of any mineral or mineral product from Afghanistan.
The President may waive this requirement for up to one year after certifying that (1) a mineral was mined (or a mineral product was produced) prior to August 16, 2021; (2) the waiver is in U.S. national interests; or (3) a fair, free, and democratic government has control of Afghanistan and is not funding, supporting, or engaging in global terrorism.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The President must develop and maintain a list of countries engaged in the trade of minerals with Afghanistan and require the heads of federal departments and agencies to review the standards, practices, and procedures of U.S. persons seeking to import any mineral or mineral product of a country on this list. Such U.S. person must keep a full record of complete information relating to the mineral or mineral product sought to be imported.
The bill provides for enforcement through fines and through customs laws relating to seizure and forfeiture.
The President must also establish an Oversight Coordinating Committee to coordinate implementation of the bill's requirements.
The Government Accountability Office must report on the effectiveness of these requirements in preventing the importation of minerals or mineral products from Afghanistan.
People & committees
Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-4] · R–AZ
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 Trade.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 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 Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 3, 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.5088 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.5088 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.5088 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.5088 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.