PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Feb 3, 2009
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Fair, Accurate, Secure, and Timely Redress Act of 2009 or the FAST Redress Act of 2009 - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish: (1) a timely and fair process for individuals who believe they were delayed or prohibited from boarding a commercial aircraft because they were wrongly identified as a threat when screened against any terrorist watchlist or database used by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) or any component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); and (2) an Office of Appeals and Redress within DHS to implement, coordinate, and execute the process.
Requires the process to include the establishment of a method for maintaining and appropriately disseminating a Comprehensive Cleared List of individuals who: (1) were misidentified; (2) completed an appeal and redress request and provided required information to verify their identity; and (3) permit their personally identifiable information to be shared between DHS components.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) transmit information necessary to resolve misidentifications, improve administration of the advanced passenger prescreening system, and reduce false positives to TSA or any other appropriate DHS component, other federal, state, local, and tribal entities, and domestic and foreign air carriers that use any terrorist watchlist or database; and (2) ensure that the List is considered when assessing an individual's security risk.
Terminates the transmission of the List to domestic and foreign air carriers on the date the federal government assumes terrorist watchlist or database screening functions.
Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) enter into memoranda of understanding with federal, state, local, and tribal entities to improve the appeal and redress process and for other purposes, such as to verify an individual's identity and personally identifiable information; and (2) work with other entities that use any terrorist watchlist or database to ensure that the List is considered when assessing an individual's security risk.
Directs the Secretary, in conjunction with DHS's Chief Privacy Officer, to: (1) require that DHS employees complete mandatory privacy and security training before being authorized to handle personally identifiable information; (2) ensure that the information maintained is secured by encryption; (3) limit the information collected from misidentified passengers or other individuals to the minimum amount necessary to resolve an appeal and redress request; (4) ensure that the information maintained is shared or transferred via an encrypted data network that has been audited to ensure that security related software functions perform properly and are updated as necessary; (5) ensure that any DHS employee receiving the information handles it in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 and other specified law; (6) retain the information for only as long as needed to assist the individual traveler in the appeal and redress process; (7) engage in cooperative agreements with appropriate federal entities to ensure that legal name changes are properly reflected in any terrorist watchlist or database and the List; and (8) conduct, publish, and report to specified congressional committees on a privacy impact assessment of the process.
Requires the Office of Appeals and Redress, at each airport at which: (1) DHS has a presence, to provide written information to air carrier passengers to begin the appeal and redress process; and (2) DHS has a significant presence, to provide that information and ensure the availability of a TSA supervisor who is trained in such process to provide support to air carrier passengers in need of guidance. Sets forth reporting requirements on the status of information sharing among users at DHS of any terrorist watchlist or database.
Incorporates the appeals and redress process into the Secure Flight Program.
People & committees
Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-11] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 413 - 3 (Roll no. 49). (text: CR H898-899)
House roll call 49 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 413 - 3 (Roll no. 49).(text: CR H898-899)
House roll call 49 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H907-908)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 559.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H898-901)
Mr. Thompson (MS) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.559 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.559 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.559 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.559 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.