PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from DOT.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 3, 1993
Maritime Navigation Technology and Research Act of 1993 - Directs the Secretary of Transportation to issue regulations which require vessels operating in a U.S. harbor to use state-of-the-art navigation, communication, and collision avoidance equipment that is compatible with Coast Guard vessel traffic systems. Requires the Secretary to conduct research and development of vessel navigation technologies. Establishes the Maritime Navigation Research Advisory Committee to advise the Secretary on maritime research programs.
People & committees
Rep. Torricelli, Robert G. [D-NJ-9] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from DOT.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Navigation.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Technology, Environment and Aviation.
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
Referred to the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
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: Aug 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.805 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.805 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.805 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.805 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.