PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 25, 2003
Rail Passenger Disaster Family Assistance Act of 2003 - Amends Federal transportation law to require the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, as soon as practicable after being notified of a rail passenger accident involving a major loss of life, to: (1) designate and publicize the name and phone number of a Board employee who shall be a director of family support services responsible for acting as a point of contact within the Federal Government for the families of passengers involved in a rail passenger accident, and a liaison between the rail passenger carrier and the families; and (2) designate an independent nonprofit organization (with experience in disasters and post-trauma communication with families) which shall have primary responsibility for coordinating the emotional care and support of the families of passengers involved in such accidents.Directs each rail passenger carrier to submit to the Secretary of Transportation and the Chairman of the Board a plan for addressing the needs of the families of passengers involved in a rail passenger accident resulting in a major loss of life.Directs the Secretary to establish a task force to develop for Congress a model plan to assist passenger rail carriers in responding to passenger rail accidents, as well as recommendations on methods to: (1) improve timely notification by passenger rail carriers to the families of passengers involved in a passenger rail accident; (2) ensure that the families of non-U.S. citizens receive appropriate assistance; and (3) ensure that emergency services personnel have as immediate and accurate a count of the number of passengers onboard the train as possible.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
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 Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 5 (Roll no. 172). (text: CR 5/07/2003 H3705-3707)
House roll call 172 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 5 (Roll no. 172).(text: CR 5/07/2003 H3705-3707)
House roll call 172 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3776-3777)
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. 874.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3705-3708; text of measure as reported in House)
Mr. Quinn moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 26.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 108-39.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 108-39.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
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 8, 2026. 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.874 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.874 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.874 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.874 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.