PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 27, 2010
Requires the Secretary of Commerce to conduct an aerial assessment of and report to Congress on the population abundance and spatial and temporal distribution of Green, Loggerhead, Leatherback, Kemp's Ridley, and Hawksbill sea turtles in state and federal waters.
Prohibits the Secretary from issuing any rule regarding incidental fisheries bycatch of any of such turtle species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) or the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act before the report is submitted. Exempts any rule to alter or restrict use of a specific gear type in a specific fishery if the Secretary certifies that the rule is an emergency rule necessary to: (1) protect such a species from being imminently determined to be endangered primarily as a result of incidental taking by that gear type in that fishery; or (2) protect such a species that is listed as an endangered species from imminent extinction primarily as a result of incidental taking of such species by that gear type in that fishery.
People & committees
Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3] · R–NC
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 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.5155 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.5155 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.5155 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.5155 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.