PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 4, 2025
Protect Our Clothes from PFAS Act
This bill revises requirements for a garment to be considered water resistant under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS). The HTS sets out the tariff rates and statistical categories for all merchandise imported into the United States.
Currently, garments that are classified under specified subheadings under chapter 62 of the HTS (e.g., water resistant trousers) must have a water resistance such that, under a head pressure of 600 millimeters, not more than 1.0 gram of water penetrates after two minutes when tested in accordance with a specified test method. Further, the water resistance must be the result of a rubber or plastics application to the outer shell, lining, or inner lining. This bill removes the requirement that the water resistance must be the result of a rubber or plastics application to the outer shell, lining, or inner lining.
People & committees
Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1] · D–ME
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 Ways and Means.
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 9, 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.960 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.960 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.960 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.960 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.