PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 385.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Sep 28, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Horse Transportation Safety Act of 2009 - Prohibits a person from transporting a horse in interstate commerce in a motor vehicle containing two or more levels stacked on top of one another. Sets forth civil penalties for persons who knowingly violate such prohibition.
People & committees
Rep. Kirk, Mark Steven [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.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 385.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 111-645.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 111-645.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E42)
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: Apr 7, 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.