PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Mar 5, 2024
Improving Travel for Families Act
This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to allow a child who is 10 years old or younger to accompany their parent (or legal guardian) in the Global Entry lane when arriving at a U.S. international airport if the parent or guardian is a Global Entry member but the child is not.
(Global Entry is a trusted traveler program that allows for the expedited processing of preapproved, low-risk travelers at certain ports of entry.)
If a parent is applying for Global Entry on behalf of such children (i.e., children authorized by this bill to travel under the parent's Global Entry membership), DHS must allow that parent to schedule a single interview relating to the parent's relationship with up to four such children.
People & committees
Rep. Luttrell, Morgan [R-TX-8] · R–TX
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 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, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H787)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H787)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5969.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H787-788)
Mr. Green (TN) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 332.
Committee on Ways and Means discharged.
Committee on Ways and Means discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 118-403, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 118-403, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
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 23, 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.5969 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.5969 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.5969 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.5969 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.