PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 12, 2013
Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper Conservation Act of 2013 - Directs the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission to: (1) prepare and adopt a data collection strategy for the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery, including interstate collaboration measures and a plan for annual stock assessments; and (2) prepare, adopt, and submit to the Secretary of Commerce a fishery management plan providing for the conservation and management of Gulf of Mexico red snapper and describing the standards of compliance for Gulf coastal states (Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas) to use in developing fishery management measures.
Permits an increase in the quota of Gulf of Mexico red snapper apportioned to commercial fishing based on stock assessments. Prohibits such plan, for a three-year period, from reducing such quota, except in the event of a reduction in stock prior to the end of such period in which case the quotas apportioned to all fishing sectors shall be reduced to ensure a sustainable harvest.
Directs the Secretary to determine whether the plan: (1) includes fishery management measures compatible with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and (2) ensures the long-term sustainability of Gulf of Mexico red snapper.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires each Gulf coastal state to submit for the Commission's approval appropriate management measures that ensure compliance with the objectives of the fishery management plan. Directs the Secretary, upon receiving the Commission's certification that the management measures of all such states have been approved, to: (1) revoke federal regulations and portions of the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico that conflict with the plan for Gulf of Mexico red snapper, and (2) transfer management of Gulf of Mexico red snapper to such states.
Directs the Commission to determine, periodically, whether state enforcement is satisfactory. Requires the Commission to: (1) offer assistance to noncompliant states, and (2) vote on whether to notify the Secretary when a state remains noncompliant. Authorizes the Secretary to close a fishery within federal waters adjacent to a noncompliant state.
Directs the Secretary to report biennially to Congress, the governor of each Gulf coastal state, and the Commission regarding the economic impacts for the local, regional, and national economy of the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery.
People & committees
Rep. Miller, Jeff [R-FL-1] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural 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: Aug 12, 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.3099 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.3099 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.3099 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.3099 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.