PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Management.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 10, 1994
Directs the Secretary of Commerce to begin preparing under the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act a fishery management plan, or an amendment to an existing plan under the Act, and proposed regulations to implement such plan or amendment (plan), which establish conservation and management measures for the northeast multispecies (groundfish) fishery. Requires the Secretary, in preparing such plan, to comply with specified procedures for negotiated rulemaking, with exceptions, including by establishing a negotiated rulemaking committee and publishing notice within 60 days. Specifies that if a negotiated rulemaking committee reaches a consensus on a plan, the Secretary may submit the plan to the New England Fishery Management Council (and if the Secretary submits the plan, it shall be treated as having been prepared by the Secretary) under the Act.
People & committees
Rep. Snowe, Olympia J. [R-ME-2] · R–ME
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Management.
Executive Comment Requested from Commerce.
Referred to the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1700)
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: Jun 2, 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.4932 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.4932 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.4932 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.4932 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.