PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 6, 2023
Passport System Reform and Backlog Prevention Act
This bill addresses issues related to the passport issuance process, including by providing the Department of State with emergency hiring authorities.
Under this bill, the State Department may hire additional personal services contractors to meet the exigent needs of the Bureau of Consular Affairs from FY2024 through FY2026. The State Department may have up to 100 such positions at any given time, and such positions may not be for longer than two years.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Furthermore, the bureau must award or expand contracts to implement certain information technology (IT) programs. Specifically, these contracts shall be to (1) provide a digital dashboard to congressional offices to track individual passport applications; (2) establish a program to provide automated messages and notifications to passport applicants, such as notifications of application errors; (3) establish a mobile application to allow passport applicants to communicate with the State Department and submit documents; (4) expand the online passport renewal system to also accommodate routine first-time adult passport applications; and (5) provide rules-based tools to screen online passport renewal applications with no changed biographical information against commercial databases.
The bureau must also solicit the private sector for proposals about commercially available technologies that may improve the passport issuance process.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) must report to Congress a comprehensive review of the passport issuance process, including opportunities to enhance the process. The bureau must periodically report to Congress on its progress in implementing the GAO's recommendations.
People & committees
Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-48] · R–CA
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 Foreign Relations.
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 H1198-1200)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1198-1200)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6610.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1198-1201)
Mrs. Wagner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 46 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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: Sep 26, 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.6610 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.6610 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.6610 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.6610 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.