PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Nov 13, 2013
Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency (FACT) Act of 2013 - Amends federal bankruptcy law concerning a trust formed under a reorganization plan following the discharge in bankruptcy of a debtor corporation in order to assume the debtor's liability with respect to claims seeking recovery for personal injury, wrongful death, or property damage allegedly caused by the presence of, or exposure to, asbestos or asbestos-containing products.
Requires such a trust to file with the bankruptcy court quarterly reports, available on the public docket, which describe each demand the trust has received from a claimant and the basis for any payment made to that claimant (excluding any confidential medical record or the claimant's full Social Security number).
Requires such reports, upon written request, and subject to payment (demanded at the option of the trust) for any reasonable cost incurred by it, to provide any information related to payment from, and demands for payment from, the trust to any party to any action in law or equity concerning liability for asbestos exposure.
People & committees
Rep. Farenthold, Blake [R-TX-27] · R–TX
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 the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 221 - 199 (Roll no. 579). (text: CR H7024-7025)
House roll call 579 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 221 - 199 (Roll no. 579).(text: CR H7024-7025)
House roll call 579 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 197 - 224 (Roll no. 578).
House roll call 578 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H7032)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Owens motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House forthwith with an amendment to exempt veterans and members of the U.S. Armed Forces from the disclosure requirements of the bill and ensure that their asbestos claims are paid before death.
Mr. Owens moved to recommit with instructions to Judiciary. (consideration: CR H7032-7033; text: CR H7032)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H7032)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 982.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7029-7034)
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 982 as unfinished business.
On motion that the committee rise Agreed to by voice vote.
Mr. Goodlatte moved that the committee rise.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes prevailed. Ms. Jackson Lee demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 403, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Nadler amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes prevailed. Mr. Nadler demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 403, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Nadler amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Cohen amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes prevailed. Mr. Goodlatte demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 403, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Cohen amendment.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 982.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 403 and Rule XVIII.
The resolution provides for the consideration of H.R. 2655 and H.R. 982. In the case of H.R. 2655, the resolution provides for one hour of debate and one motion to recommit. In the case of H.R. 982, the resolution provides for one hour of general debate and makes in order only those amendments printed in the Rules Committee report. The resolution also provides for one motion to recommit the bill H.R. 982.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 403. (consideration: CR H7017-7029)
The Speaker designated the Honorable Rob Bishop to act as Chairman of the Committee.
Rule H. Res. 403 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 403 Reported to House. The resolution provides for the consideration of H.R. 2655 and H.R. 982. In the case of H.R. 2655, the resolution provides for one hour of debate and one motion to recommit. In the case of H.R. 982, the resolution provides for one hour of general debate and makes in order only those amendments printed in the Rules Committee report. The resolution also provides for one motion to recommit the bill H.R. 982.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on Judiciary, H. Rept. 113-254, Part II.
Supplemental report filed by the Committee on Judiciary, H. Rept. 113-254, Part II.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 180.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 113-254.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 113-254.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 17 - 14.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial And Antitrust Law.
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.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.982 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.982 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.982 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.982 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.