PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 8, 2001
Directs the Attorney General to increase by 50 for each of FY 2002 through 2006 the number of Immigration and Naturalization Service (full-time) investigators or other enforcement personnel assigned to combat alien smuggling.Directs the United States Sentencing Commission to promulgate or amend sentencing guidelines for alien smuggling-related activities so as to: (1) double specified minimum prison terms for smuggling, transporting, harboring, or inducement; (2) increase minimum fines; and (3) increase by at least two offense levels sentencing for intentionally or recklessly creating a substantial risk of serious bodily injury or causing bodily injury or death. Exempts from such provisions offenses: (1) committed other than for profit; or (2) involving the smuggling, transporting, or harboring only of the defendant's spouse, child, or both.
People & committees
Rep. Keller, Ric [R-FL-8] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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: Jan 2, 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.957 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.957 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.957 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.957 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.