PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 116-313.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Jan 5, 2021
This bill extends federal torts claim coverage for certain personal injury claims (i.e., medical malpractice liability protection) to urban Indian organizations and their employees by deeming them as part of the Public Health Service. Currently, such coverage is provided to Indian tribes, tribal organizations, Indian contractors, and their employees.
People & committees
Rep. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ-7] · D–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 116-313.
Became Public Law No: 116-313.
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 S7871)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S7871)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
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 H7245)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6535.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7245-7247)
Mr. Gallego moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 535.
Committee on the Judiciary discharged.
Committee on the Judiciary discharged.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 116-651, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 116-651, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and the Judiciary, 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 Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and the Judiciary, 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 Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and the Judiciary, 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.6535 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.6535 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.6535 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.6535 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.