A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1700 Cleveland Avenue in Kansas City, Missouri, as the "Reverend Earl Abel Post Office Building".
Became Public Law No: 110-353.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 7, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Designates the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1700 Cleveland Avenue in Kansas City, Missouri, as the "Reverend Earl Abel Post Office Building."
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection. (text: CR H10210)
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.(text: CR H10210)
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H10209-10210)
Committee on Oversight and Government discharged.
Committee on Oversight and Government discharged.
Mr. Clay asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6331; text as passed Senate: CR S6331)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6331; text as passed Senate: CR S6331)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 842.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs referred to Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5043)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5043)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.3082 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.3082 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.3082 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.3082 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.