H.R. 4590: To require that reimbursement provided to members of the Armed Forces who purchased their own protective body armor when military-issue body armor was unavailable include reimbursement for the cost to deliver the body armor to the member.
Before you vote › Federal bills
H.R. 4590: To require that reimbursement provided to members of the Armed Forces who purchased their own protective body armor when military-issue body armor was unavailable include reimbursement for the cost to deliver the body armor to the member.
108th Congress · introduced 2004-06-16 · Armed Forces and National Security · Latest: Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2004-06-16 · official record
- Who proposed it: Rep. Ackerman, Gary L. [D-NY-5] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
- If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.
Official title
To require that reimbursement provided to members of the Armed Forces who purchased their own protective body armor when military-issue body armor was unavailable include reimbursement for the cost to deliver the body armor to the member.
Plain summary
States that the cost of delivering protective body armor to a member of the Armed Forces for use in connection with Operation Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom, or Operation Iraqi Freedom shall be included in any reimbursement for such body armor that is provided by the Secretary of Defense to the member or to another person on the member's behalf.
Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.
What a vote does
A “Yea” vote
If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.
A “Nay” vote
If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.
PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).
What does this mean? (plain words)
Official text
To require that reimbursement provided to members of the Armed Forces who purchased their own protective body armor when military-issue body armor was unavailable include reimbursement for the cost to deliver the body armor to the member.
Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text
No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.
Limited to a few requests an hour per person.
The strongest published arguments
Arguments for (supporters)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Arguments against (opponents)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Alternatives
Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes
Officials and money
Sponsor: Rep. Ackerman, Gary L. [D-NY-5] · 0 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
- Congress.gov
- Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-108hr4590.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/108/hr>
Record fed-us-cong108-hr4590 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong108 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong108