PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.650 / 106th Congress

To assess the impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement on domestic job loss and the environment, and for other purposes.

Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 9, 1999

Directs the Secretary of Commerce to determine, and report to Congress, the levels of exports of U.S. goods to North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) parties and imports into the United States of goods from NAFTA parties, and the number of jobs that have resulted from increased exports of goods to NAFTA parties and the loss of jobs that have resulted from increased imports into the United States of goods from NAFTA parties since January 1, 1994.Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to investigate, and report to the Congress on, whether pollution and health hazards in the United States have worsened since January 1, 1994, to the extent that may be attributable to NAFTA, and specifically in and around the U.S.-Mexico and the U.S.-Canada borders.Directs the President to certify annually to Congress whether or not each NAFTA country is meeting certain commitments made with respect to: (1) environmental protection in the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation; and (2) workers' rights in the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Rivers, Lynn N. [D-MI-13] · D–MI

Committees

  • Ways and Means Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.

    2. Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

    3. Introduced in House

    4. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    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.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze H.R.650 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine H.R.650 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine H.R.650 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine H.R.650 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.

    View full prompt & sources