PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 103-375.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 28, 1994
Amends the North American Wetlands Conservation Act to extend the authorization of appropriations to carry out such Act through FY 2000.
People & committees
Rep. Dingell, John D. [D-MI-16] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 103-375.
Became Public Law No: 103-375.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate in lieu of S. 1857 without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S14079)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate in lieu of S. 1857 without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S14079)
Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 615.
Received in the Senate.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 368 - 5 (Roll no. 423).
House roll call 423 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 368 - 5 (Roll no. 423).
House roll call 423 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H9116)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9034-9037)
Mr. Studds moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 394.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries. H. Rept. 103-717.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries. H. Rept. 103-717.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources.
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.
Source last updated: Sep 25, 2021. 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.4308 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.4308 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.4308 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.4308 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.