PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-446.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 27, 2000
Requires the Secretary of Defense to revise Department of Defense policy regarding the euthanization of military working dogs to: (1) terminate the practice of euthanizing such dogs at the end of their useful life; and (2) limit such euthanization to when medically necessary or necessary for the public safety.Requires the Secretary to make such a dog available for adoption by law enforcement agencies, former handlers, and other persons capable of humanely caring for such dogs. Requires the commander of the last unit to which the dog is assigned to make the decision whether a particular dog is suitable or unsuitable for adoption. Directs the Secretary to require that any dog recipient hold harmless the United States from any damages or injury caused by a dog after such transfer.Requires an annual report from the Secretary to Congress concerning dogs adopted, waiting for adoption, or euthanized during the preceding year (with an explanation in the case of euthanization).
People & committees
Rep. Bartlett, Roscoe G. [R-MD-6] · R–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-446.
Became Public Law No: 106-446.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote. (consideration: CR H11302-11303; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H11302-11303)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote.(consideration: CR H11302-11303; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H11302-11303)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the motion.
Mr. Bartlett moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S10942-10943)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
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 amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H9599)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9599)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5314.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9599-9601)
Mr. Bartlett moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
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 6, 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.5314 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.5314 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.5314 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.5314 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.