PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 15, 2008
Original Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle Ultra-High Relief Palladium Bullion Coin Act - Authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to mint and issue a $20 coin that bears, on the obverse and reverse, the designs of the famous 27-millimeter version of the 1907 Augustus Saint-Gaudens Double Eagle ultra-high relief gold piece.
Authorizes the Secretary to commence minting and issuing such coins for sale, beginning January 1, 2009, in: (1) an appropriate number of $20 bullion investment coins meeting specified requirements; and (2) up to 15,000 ultra-high relief numismatic $20 coins meeting certain other requirements. Requires all coins to be minted at West Point, New York.
Prohibits numismatic coins from being made available as so-called "fractional" coins.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary to take specified protective and anti-counterfeiting measures.
Instructs the Treasury Inspector General to report to certain congressional committees on the extent of counterfeiting of rare, collectible, or numismatic coins for sale in the United States, regardless of the country where the original of such coin was produced or of the country in which the counterfeiting takes place, or sales overseas if such counterfeit coins are unauthorized copies of coins originally produced by the U.S. Mint.
People & committees
Rep. Castle, Michael N. [R-DE-At Large] · R–DE
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 Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 415 - 0 (Roll no. 325). (text: CR 5/13/2008 H3720-3721)
House roll call 325 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 415 - 0 (Roll no. 325).(text: CR 5/13/2008 H3720-3721)
House roll call 325 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3903-3904)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Simpson objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5614.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3719-3722)
Mr. Gutierrez moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
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.
Source last updated: Jan 10, 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.5614 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.5614 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.5614 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.5614 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.