PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 110-335.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 2, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the District of Columbia Official Code to increase from $65 to $80 the hourly rate of attorneys representing indigent defendants in the District of Columbia courts.
Revises the current cap on total compensation paid to an attorney representing such a defendant to apply the corresponding caps under the federal criminal code. Increases the cap: (1) before the Superior Court of the District from $1,900 to $2,000 for misdemeanors and from $3,600 to $7,000 for felonies; and (2) to the same amounts for post-trial matters for misdemeanors or felonies.
Sets the cap for representation of a defendant before the District of Columbia Court of Appeals at $5,000, the limitation under the federal criminal code for representation of a defendant in an appellate court.
People & committees
Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 110-335.
Became Public Law No: 110-335.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Cleared for White House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8875)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S8875)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 900.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman without amendment. With written report No. 110-432.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman without amendment. With written report No. 110-432.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1852)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H1852)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5551.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1852-1853)
Mr. Davis (IL) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 343.
Reported by the Committee on Oversight and Government. H. Rept. 110-560.
Reported by the Committee on Oversight and Government. H. Rept. 110-560.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E320)
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: 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.5551 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.5551 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.5551 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.5551 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.