PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 113-105.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · May 23, 2014
American Fighter Aces Congressional Gold Medal Act - Directs the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate to arrange for the presentation of a single congressional gold medal in honor of the American Fighter Aces, collectively, in recognition of their heroic military service and defense of the nation's freedom.
Requires the medal to be given to the Smithsonian Institution for display and research purposes. Expresses the sense of Congress that the medal should be made available for display elsewhere, particularly at locations associated with the American Fighter Aces.
Authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to strike and sell bronze duplicates of the gold medal at a price sufficient to cover the costs of the medals.
People & committees
Rep. Johnson, Sam [R-TX-3] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 113-105.
Became Public Law No: 113-105.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3192)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S3192)
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 381 - 0 (Roll no. 219). (text: CR H4456)
House roll call 219 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 381 - 0 (Roll no. 219).(text: CR H4456)
House roll call 219 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4459-4460)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 685.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4456-4458)
Mr. Huizenga (MI) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, 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 Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, 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.685 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.685 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.685 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.685 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.