PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 103-68.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 26, 1993
Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to cite conditions under which it shall not be unlawful for members of exchanges and associated persons to effect a transaction for an account with respect to which they exercise investment discretion. Permits transactions for such a managed account (without the involvement of an independent floor broker) if the member or associated person: (1) has obtained express authorization from the person or persons authorized to transact business for the account before engaging in the practice of effecting such transactions; (2) furnishes the persons authorized to transact business for the account with a statement at least annually disclosing the aggregate compensation received by the exchange member in effecting such transactions; and (3) complies with any rules the Securities and Exchange Commission has prescribed with respect to such requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA-7] · D–MA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 103-68.
Became Public Law No: 103-68.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S9866)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S9866)
Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 63.
Received in the Senate.
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.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2220-2221)
Mr. Markey moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 34.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 103-76.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 103-76.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E158)
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: Jan 2, 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.616 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.616 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.616 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.616 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.