A bill supported by nearly three-fourths of members in the U.S. House of Representatives finally made it out of committee Wednesday, moving authorities a step closer toward needing a warrant to access Americans' stored emails.

The bill would eliminate the present-day ability of government agents to acquire emails older than 180 days without a warrant, something reform advocates say should alarm Americans.

Due to qualms from law enforcement, the Email Privacy Act was weakened slightly in a compromise brokered by House Judiciary Commitee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., who described himself during Wednesday's committee session as "a strong advocate for enhancing Americans' privacy."

But all parties appeared to buy into the compromise, notably the diverse and bipartisan alliance that has railed against domestic surveillance and pressed for reforms that often are blocked, stalled or watered down by an equally bipartisan alliance of House and Senate leaders.

Committee members who attended the Wednesday session unanimously voted to send the bill to the full House for consideration.

The reform would modify the Stored Communications Act of 1986, which was implemented before most Americans used email and allows for the warrantless collection of older emails, along with arguably the warrantless collection of opened emails sent within the last 180 days.

Goodlatte's amendment changed the reform bill so that warrants will not be served on email users, but rather on providers who then will notify customers – unless they are barred by a legal order granted by a judge.

Goodlatte said the amendment also clarifies what commercial public content can be acquired without a warrant and adds a carveout for congressional oversight.

If any of those terms are cause for alarm, vocal privacy advocates on the committee did not say so.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren – a California Democrat who had no qualms about forcing committee colleagues to consider doomed privacy amendment after doomed privacy amendment to the USA Freedom Act, which ended the government's automatic bulk collection of domestic call records – voiced support for the bill.

Lofgren and others, including Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R--Utah, said they were pleased by Goodlatte's statement that he will hold a hearing on extending warrant protection to domestic geolocation data within the next year or two.

A former federal prosecutor, Rep. Tom Marino, R-Pa., said he and Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wash., hope to pass legislation further clarifying that U.S. records stored oversees enjoy the same legal protection, winning a receptive echo from Goodlatte.

“The Fourth Amendment’s 'papers and effects' are today’s emails, tweets and posts,” Marino said.

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said he was glad the compromise does not include carveouts for specific government agencies.

“This legislation is six years in the making and it should not be delayed any further," Conyers said. “It’s an idea whose time has come ... The Email Privacy Act enjoys more support than any bill that has not yet seen action on the floor of the House of Representatives."

The Email Privacy Act's primary sponsor is Rep. Kevin Yoder, R-Kan. Similar bills were proposed by other lawmakers, but Yoder's legislation was by far the most popular, with 314 co-sponsors in the 435-member House.

Committee passage does not, however, indicate reform is inevitable. Privacy-enhancing amendments extraordinarily popular among rank-and-file lawmakers have been scrapped before. An amendment that would ban two types of "backdoor" surveillance of Americans, for example, twice has won lopsided House support before being deleted in leadership-negotiated deals.

A bill requiring warrants for emails that was sponsored by Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Mike Lee, R-Utah, passed the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2013 but died without a floor vote.

In a joint statement, Lee and Leahy said Wednesday "the American people deserve a law that matches today’s digital age" and expressed hope the full House and Senate each would adopt the measure.