PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Received from DOE.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 5, 1993
National Biological Diversity Conservation and Environmental Research Act - States that the conservation of biological diversity is a national priority. Requires Federal actions to be consistent with such goal. Directs the Council on Environmental Quality to: (1) issue regulations to require agencies to assess the impacts of Federal actions on biological diversity in preparing environmental impact statements under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; and (2) identify those biotic communities, species, and populations that appear to be in decline, in imminent danger of loss of viability, or otherwise of special concern. Requires Federal agencies to review their programs for consistency with the conservation of biological diversity and to report review results to the President, the Council, and the Congress. Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, in reviewing environmental impact statements, to take into account the impacts of proposed actions on biological diversity. Establishes an Interagency Working Committee on Biological Diversity to develop a coordinated Federal strategy for conservation of biological diversity. Dissolves the Committee after submission to the Congress of the strategy. Establishes a National Center for Biological Diversity and Conservation Research within the Smithsonian Institution to set research priorities and coordinate the understanding and promotion of knowledge of the biota. Authorizes appropriations. Requires the Council to retain the National Academy of Sciences to: (1) provide scientific and technical advice and counsel in the preparation of the Federal strategy; and (2) provide a general reference and scientific and technical advisory source for the Nation in matters relating to the conservation of biological diversity.
People & committees
Rep. Porter, John Edward [R-IL-10] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Received from DOE.
Executive Comment Requested from Commerce, DOD, DOE, Interior, EPA, CEQ.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Technology, Environment, and Aviation.
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
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.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.R.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.R.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.R.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.