PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy, Technology and Economic Growth.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 7, 2001
Amends the Emergency Steel Loan Guarantee Act of 1999 to permit the use of guaranteed loan proceeds to repay outstanding debts of a qualified steel company.Sets a maximum principal loan guarantee of 95 percent if the Loan Guarantee Board determines that the aggregate amount of imported steel during the prior year exceeds 30 percent of the aggregate amount of domestic steel produced during that year.Permits conversion of such loan guarantee to a grant to a steel company for loan repayment purposes if the company is unable to repay the loan because of financial hardship beyond its control, has demonstrated a good faith effort to be cost efficient, and such grant is in the U.S. national security interest.Insulates the Board's loan guarantee authority for steel companies from the authority of any other Federal department or agency, including the Office of Management and Budget.
People & committees
Rep. Traficant, James A., Jr. [D-OH-17] · D–OH
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 Domestic Monetary Policy, Technology and Economic Growth.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
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.520 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.520 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.520 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.520 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.