PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 16, 2001
Expresses the sense of Congress that, to provide a fair and equitable opportunity for individuals to hunt for mourning doves: (1) the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 should be modified to allow for mourning dove hunting during the last week in August in areas north of 37 degrees north latitude; (2) the United States should begin discussions with the appropriate parties to ensure that all Americans have an opportunity to harvest migratory mourning doves in an equitable manner; and (3) hunters and wildlife management agencies in States north of 37 degrees north latitude should support an earlier opening date for the mourning dove hunting season.
People & committees
Rep. Hansen, James V. [R-UT-1] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H709)
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H709)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H. Con. Res. 275.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H. Con. Res. 275.
The Speaker designated the Honorable John Shimkus to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 353 and Rule XXIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 275 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is open to amendments.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 353. (consideration: CR H708-710)
Rule H. Res. 353 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 353 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 275 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is open to amendments.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 126.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 107-362.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 107-362.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
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 H.Con.Res.275 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 H.Con.Res.275 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 H.Con.Res.275 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 H.Con.Res.275 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.