PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Pursuant to the order of May 9, 1995, that if and when reported by the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation the bill be referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works for a period not to exceed 20 session days to report or be discharged and placed on the calendar.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · May 1, 1995
Striped Bass Conservation Act Amendments of 1995 - Amends the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act to authorize appropriations to carry out the Act. Requires the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission to establish standards and procedures to ensure opportunity for public participation in the preparation of any plan for Atlantic striped bass management. Amends the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act to: (1) mandate cooperation with States and other non-Federal interests in conducting studies of the effects of water quality and other habitat changes on the recruitment, spawning potential, mortality rates, and population abundance of the Delaware River striped bass population (current law mandates such cooperation in three other studies); and (2) authorize appropriations to carry out such studies.
People & committees
Rep. Saxton, Jim [R-NJ-3] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Pursuant to the order of May 9, 1995, that if and when reported by the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation the bill be referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works for a period not to exceed 20 session days to report or be discharged and placed on the calendar.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4558-4559)
Mr. Saxton moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 50.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-105.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-105.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior, Commerce.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, 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.R.1139 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.R.1139 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.R.1139 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.R.1139 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.