PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Rules and Organization of the House.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 18, 1995
Emergency Lumber Act of 1995 - Imposes a 25 percent ad valorem duty on imported Canadian wood and lumber products. Requires the administering authority to initiate a countervailing duty investigation with respect to such products. Declares that the President is authorized to negotiate with free trade area countries for the purpose of entering into an agreement to modify certain terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the United States-Canada Free-Trade Agreement to provide: (1) that the exclusive review by binational panels shall not apply to antidumping and countervailing duty determinations involving their merchandise; and (2) that such determinations shall be subject to judicial review in the same manner as determinations made with respect to non-free trade area countries. Declares further that: (1) such negotiations shall not affect the rights of the United States or a free trade area country to apply its domestic antidumping and countervailing duty laws to the imports of another country; and (2) if an agreement has been entered into pursuant to such negotiations, the President shall submit implementing legislation to the Congress. Extends "fast track" procedures to such legislation. Applies the requirements of this Act to goods from Canada or Mexico.
People & committees
Rep. Longley, James B., Jr. [R-ME-1] · R–ME
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 Rules and Organization of the House.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 21, 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.2802 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.2802 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.2802 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.2802 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.