PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 430.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 11, 2006
Public Transportation Terrorism Prevention Act of 2006 - Requires the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Federal Transit Administration to submit all public transportation security assessments to the Secretary of Homeland Security to review and augment such assessments.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) establish and update annually security improvement priorities; (2) conduct security assessments of all public transportation agencies considered to be at greatest risk of a terrorist attack; (3) conduct security assessments to determine the specific needs of local bus-only public transportation systems and of selected rural transportation systems; and (4) use information collected to establish the process for developing security guidelines.
Directs the Secretary to award grants: (1) directly to public transportation agencies for allowable capital security improvements; and (2) to public or private entities to conduct research into, and demonstrate, methods to reduce and deter terrorist threats or mitigate damages resulting from terrorist attacks against public transportation systems.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) ensure that DOT receives timely notification of all credible terrorist threats against U.S. public transportation assets; and (2) award grants for research, development, and demonstration of technologies and methods to reduce and deter terrorist threats or mitigate damages resulting from such attacks.
Rail Security Act of 2006 - Directs the Secretary to establish a task force to complete, and make prioritized recommendations regarding, a vulnerability and risk assessment of freight and passenger rail transportation for identification of: (1) critical assets and infrastructures, and vulnerabilities and risks, to such assets and infrastructures; (2) vulnerabilities and risks specific to the transportation of hazardous materials via railroad; and (3) security weaknesses in passenger and cargo security, transportation infrastructure, protection systems, procedural policies, communications systems, employee training, emergency response planning, and any other area.
Authorizes the Secretary to make grants for certain system-wide Amtrak security upgrades.
Directs the Secretary to require rail carriers transporting high hazardous materials to develop high hazard material security threat mitigation plans containing appropriate measures (including alternative routing and temporary shipment suspension options) to address assessed risks to high consequence targets.
Maritime Security Improvement Act of 2006 - Establishes interagency operational centers to provide greater protection against terrorism at high priority ports.
Directs the Secretary to identify foreign assistance programs that could facilitate implementation of port security antiterrorism measures in foreign countries.
People & committees
Sen. Stevens, Ted [R-AK] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 430.
Introduced in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4473-4474)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 11, 2023. 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 S.2791 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 S.2791 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 S.2791 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 S.2791 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.