PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 17, 2005
Recognizes hunting as a legitimate and necessary tool of wildlife resource management.
Affirms the vital importance of lawful regulated hunting in maintaining healthy populations of wildlife.
Declares, as a matter of principle, that no federal law should be passed which limits the taking and consumptive use of wildlife, except reasonable laws to: (1) ensure the safety of hunters and the continued perpetuation of wildlife; (2) protect endangered species; (3) protect species not traditionally considered as game or suitable for consumptive use; and (4) ensure hunting is carried out in a sportsmanlike manner.
People & committees
Rep. Green, Mark [R-WI-8] · R–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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 H.Con.Res.305 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.305 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.305 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.305 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.