PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 28, 2010
Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute Enhancement Act - Authorizes the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution to construct a facility for the purpose of conducting research and educational programs on National Zoological Park property in Front Royal, Virginia.
Authorizes the Board of Regents to enter into agreements to provide (at no cost to the Smithsonian Institution) housing and other services to participants in such programs.
Authorizes the Board of Regents to construct animal holding and related program facilities on such property to be funded from non-federal sources.
People & committees
Rep. Becerra, Xavier [D-CA-31] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
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 H7157)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7157)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5717.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7157-7158)
Mrs. Davis (CA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 355.
Reported by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 111-612, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 111-612, Part II.
Reported by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 111-612, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 111-612, Part II.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to House Transportation and Infrastructure
Referred to House Administration
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1309)
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.5717 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.5717 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.5717 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.5717 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.