PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 20, 2012
Bars the Secretary of the Air Force from divesting, retiring, or transferring to any Air Force aircraft assigned to units of the Air National Guard or Air Force Reserve as of December 31, 2012, until Congress receives: (1) the reports required by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 concerning an analysis of the costs of deployable units of the active components and the reserve components of the Armed Forces, and (2) the report of the National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force required by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 concerning a comprehensive study on the structure of the Air Force.
Allows the divestment or retirement of C-5A aircraft if such aircraft is replaced through a transfer of C-5B, C-5M, or C-17 mobility aircraft in order to maintain all Guard and Reserve units at current or higher assigned manpower levels to operate the aircraft so transferred.
People & committees
Rep. Latham, Tom [R-IA-4] · R–IA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
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: Jun 6, 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.6690 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.6690 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.6690 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.6690 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.