PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3805-3806)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 17, 2003
Catch-Up Lost Retirement Savings Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow, until December 31, 2007, an individual who participated in a retirement plan under which the employer matched at least 50 percent of the employee's contribution with the employer's stock and whose employer filed for bankruptcy and was subject to a related prosecution resulting from business transactions to make three times the otherwise applicable deductible retirement contributions and to receive a credit for 50 percent for such contributions.
People & committees
Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3805-3806)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3805)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 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 S.629 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.629 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.629 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.629 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.