PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 196.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Aug 2, 2017
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
HUBZone Investment Protection Act
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Small Business Act with respect to Historically Underutilized Business Zones (HUBZones) located in qualified census tracts, qualified nonmetropolitan counties, or redesignated areas, which are census tracts or nonmetropolitan counties that cease to meet the ordinary criteria for the HUBZone program but are "redesignated" to qualify for it.
The bill increases the length of time a census tract or nonmetropolitan county may be redesignated to qualify for HUBZone status from three years to seven years after the date on which the area ceased to meet the ordinary criteria.
People & committees
Sen. Cardin, Benjamin L. [D-MD] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 196.
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Reported by Senator Risch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Reported by Senator Risch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.690 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.690 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.690 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.690 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.