PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Received from Justice.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 28, 1993
Gulf of Mexico Economic and Environmental Protection Act of 1993 - Authorizes an interagency program for the preservation and protection of the economic and environmental resources of the Gulf of Mexico, to be known as the Gulf of Mexico Program. Designates the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as the lead agency of the Program. Establishes a Gulf of Mexico Program Office within EPA, to be located in a Gulf State. Requires the President to establish a Gulf of Mexico Executive Board. Directs the Board to establish a Gulf Citizens Advisory Committee. Directs the Board to: (1) develop a preliminary comprehensive joint plan for the Gulf to recommend a mechanism for balancing priority actions to address Gulf economic and environmental problems; and (2) report to the Congress on the impact of environmental quality on the economic viability of the Gulf. Directs the EPA Administrator to develop a final plan similar to the preliminary plan. Requires Federal agencies represented on the Board and appropriate non-federal and private entities to carry out the plan. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Laughlin, Greg [D-TX-14] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Received from Justice.
Joint Hearings Held by the Subcommittee on Oceanography, Gulf of Mexico, and the Outer Continental Shelf and by the Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources.
Joint Hearings Held by the Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources and by the Subcommittee on Oceanography, Gulf of Mexico, and the Outer Continental Shelf.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Technology, Environment and Aviation.
Executive Comment Requested from EPA.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Oceanography, Gulf of Mexico, and the Outer Continental Shelf.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1085)
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
Referred to the House Committee on Public Works + Transportation.
Referred to the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
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: Aug 26, 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.R.1899 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.1899 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.1899 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.1899 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.