PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 119.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Jul 20, 2009
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on April 21, 2009. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Crane Conservation Act of 2009 - Requires the Secretary of the Interior to provide financial assistance for approved projects relating to the conservation of cranes, using amounts in the Crane Conservation Fund established by this Act.
Allows a project proposal to be submitted by: (1) any wildlife management authority of a country located in the African, Asian, European, or North American range of a species of crane that carries out at least one activity that affects crane populations; (2) the Secretariat of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora; and (3) any person or organization with demonstrated expertise in the conservation of cranes. Establishes the Crane Conservation Fund in the Multinational Species Conservation Fund.Authorizes the Secretary to convene an advisory group representing public and private organizations actively involved in the conservation of cranes to assist in carrying out this Act.Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI-2] · D–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 119.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer without amendment. With written report No. 111-54.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer without amendment. With written report No. 111-54.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
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): 288 - 116 (Roll no. 193). (text: CR H4530-4531)
House roll call 193 · 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): 288 - 116 (Roll no. 193).(text: CR H4530-4531)
House roll call 193 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4548-4549)
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. 388.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4530-4533)
Mrs. Christensen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife.
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.388 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.388 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.388 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.388 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.