PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 18, 2014
Vehicle Safety Improvement Act of 2014 - Revises and expands requirements relating to public disclosure by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of: (1) defects in motor vehicles or equipment, whether or not such defects are safety-related; and (2) noncompliance with vehicle safety standards. Requires: (1) public disclosure of early warning information submitted by vehicle manufactures unless exempt from disclosure by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), (2) public disclosure of summaries of NHTSA inquiries to manufacturers seeking additional information about fatal incidents, and (3) NHTSA to increase public accessibility to information on the vehicle safety databases of NHTSA and to issue a final rule requiring manufacturers to retain certain safety-related records for a 20-year period.
Increases civil penalties for violations of federal motor vehicle safety requirements.
Directs NHTSA to: (1) order notification and remediation of a defect or noncompliance, in motor vehicles or equipment, that presents an imminent hazard, and (2) issue a final rule to establish standards for reducing pedestrian injuries and fatalities. Authorizes NHTSA to enter into cooperative agreements and collaborative motor safety research and development agreements with foreign governments.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits a car dealer from selling or leasing a used motor vehicle until: (1) the dealer clearly and conspicuously notifies the purchaser or lessee, in writing, of any notification of a defect or noncompliance that has not been remedied; and (2) the purchaser or lessee acknowledges receipt of such notice.
Requires manufacturers who file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection (liquidation) to comply with their recall obligations (currently, this requirement applies only to manufacturers in Chapter 11 reorganization proceedings).
People & committees
Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9] · D–IL
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 Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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 12, 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.5654 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.5654 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.5654 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.5654 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.