PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 25, 2004
States that the House of Representatives recognizes the exemplary accomplishments and contributions of the Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction (also known as the Gilmore Commission) to improvements to the homeland security of the United States.
Urges Congress to: (1) implement the remaining recommendations by the Gilmore Commission, including the 20 additional recommendations made in its fifth annual report, "Forging America's New Normalcy: Securing Our Homeland, Protecting Our Liberty", published in December 2003; (2) establish an advisory panel to report to the President and Congress on the adequacy of State, local, and private sector entities to respond to terrorist, environmental, and accidental catastrophes and the coordination of the response of these entities with that of Federal agencies; and (3) establish an advisory panel to report to the President and Congress on deficiencies in protection of the Nation's critical infrastructures and strategies to protect those infrastructures.
Urges the President to establish an independent, bipartisan oversight board to provide counsel on the effects on civil liberties of homeland security efforts.
People & committees
Rep. Weldon, Curt [R-PA-7] · R–PA
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 the Constitution.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committees on Armed Services, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 6, 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.Res.537 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.Res.537 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.Res.537 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.Res.537 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.