PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 24, 2004
Electronic Duck Stamp Act of 2004 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a three-year pilot program under which up to 15 States authorized by the Secretary may issue electronic migratory bird hunting and conservation stamps.
Requires implementation of the program no later than one year after the beginning of the first full Federal migratory waterfowl hunting seasons after enactment of this Act and continuation of the program for three such seasons.
Prohibits a State's participation in the program absent the Secretary's approval of an application providing details of the State's electronic stamp process.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary to publish: (1) deadlines for the submission of State applications; (2) eligibility requirements for program participation; and (3) criteria for selecting States for the program.
Directs the Secretary to require participating States to: (1) provide an actual (paper) stamp to each individual to whom the State sells an electronic stamp by the date on which the electronic stamp expires; and (2) collect and transmit to the Secretary electronic stamp revenue and customer information.
Authorizes participating States to charge a reasonable fee to cover program costs.
Sets forth requirements for electronic stamps.
Authorizes termination of a State's participation in the program by the Secretary, upon written notice, for violations of the terms of an approved application or by the State.
Requires the Secretary to evaluate and report on the pilot program.
People & committees
Rep. Kind, Ron [D-WI-3] · D–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
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: Aug 18, 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.4685 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.4685 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.4685 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.4685 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.