PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S2850)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 16, 2005
Amends the Inspector General Act to require the Inspector General (IG) of the Department of Justice (DOJ), in preparing semiannual reports on the activities of the IG's office, to describe each settlement or compromise of any claim, suit, or other action entered into with the DOJ that: (1) related to an alleged violation of statutory provisions prohibiting major fraud or false claims against the United States (including all settlements of alternative remedies); and (2) results from a claim of damages in excess of $100,000.
Specifies the required elements of each such description.
People & committees
Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA] · R–IA
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 Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S2850)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2849-2850)
Introduced in Senate
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: Jan 14, 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.636 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.636 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.636 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.636 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.