PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 7, 2004
Federal Flight Deck Officer Improvement Act of 2004 - Instructs the Secretary of Transportation to: (1) study and report to certain congressional committees on the feasibility of conducting Federal flight deck officer initial training; (2) ensure that eligible pilots are offered a choice of training dates, and given advance notice of them; (3) establish a program to improve travel access to Federal flight deck officer training facilities through the use of charter flights or improved scheduled air carrier service; (4) establish qualification standards for facilities where Federal flight deck officers can receive requalification and recurrent training; and (5) provide Federal flight deck officer training, requalification training, and recurrent training at no cost to the pilots or the air carriers that employ them.
Directs the Secretary to establish a secure means for personnel of the Transportation Security Administration to communicate with Federal flight deck officers, and for Federal flight deck officers to communicate with each other.
Directs the Secretary to implement a pilot program to allow pilots participating in the Federal flight deck officer program to transport their firearms on their persons.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Encourages the President to pursue aggressively agreements with foreign governments to allow maximum deployment of Federal flight deck officers on international flights.
Requires the Secretary to work with relevant Federal agencies to obtain compensation for the death or injury of a Federal flight deck officer sustained while in the performance of his or her duties under the program.
Expresses the sense of Congress that air carriers should permit Federal flight deck officers to take a leave of absence from their employment as required to attend initial and requalification Federal flight deck officer training.
People & committees
Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4] · D–OR
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 Transportation and Infrastructure.
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.5250 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.5250 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.5250 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.5250 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.