PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 478 as unfinished business.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 21, 1997
Flood Prevention and Family Protection Act of 1997 - Amends the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to exempt from provisions requiring consultation and conferencing with the Secretary of the Interior any agency action that consists of: (1) building, operating, maintaining, or repairing a Federal or non-Federal flood control project, facility, or structure to address a critical, imminent threat to public health or safety or a catastrophic natural event or to comply with Federal, State, or local public health or safety requirements; or (2) routine operation, maintenance, rehabilitation, repair, or replacement of a Federal or non-Federal flood control project, facility, or structure, including operation of a project or facility in accordance with a previously issued Federal authorization. Provides that any activity by a Federal or non-Federal person that consists of such an action is not a taking of a species for purposes of the Act.
People & committees
Rep. Herger, Wally [R-CA-2] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 478 as unfinished business.
DEBATE - Debate on the Boehlert amendment as amended, and all amendments thereto, resumed pursuant to the previous unanimous consent agreement.
LIMITATION OF DEBATE - Mr. Pombo asked unanimous consent that further debate on the Boehlert amendment in the nature of a substitute as amended, and all amendments thereto, be limited to not to exceed 30 minutes equally divided and controlled. Agreed to without objection.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Doc Hastings to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 142 and Rule XXIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 478 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Resources now printed in the bill. Measure will be read by section. Bill is open to amendments.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 142. (consideration: CR H2283-2313)
Rule H. Res. 142 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 142 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 478 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Resources now printed in the bill. Measure will be read by section. Bill is open to amendments.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 50.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 105-75.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 105-75.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 23 - 9.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
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.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.478 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.478 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.478 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.478 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.