PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 115-49.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Aug 18, 2017
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House passed version is repeated here.)
(Sec. 1) This bill makes permanent the authority of Washington, Oregon, and California to adopt and enforce state laws governing fishing and processing in the exclusive economic zone adjacent to their state in any Dungeness crab fishery for which there is no fishery management plan in effect under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.
People & committees
Rep. Herrera Beutler, Jaime [R-WA-3] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 115-49.
Became Public Law No: 115-49.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S4894)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S4894)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 388 - 0 (Roll no. 66). (text: CR H713)
House roll call 66 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 388 - 0 (Roll no. 66).(text: CR H713)
House roll call 66 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H719-720)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 374.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H713-714)
Mr. McClintock moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
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: Dec 5, 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.374 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.374 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.374 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.374 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.