PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 114-237.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 7, 2016
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on September 20, 2016. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Clarification of Treatment of Electronic Sales of Livestock Act of 2016
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921 to expand the definition of "marketing agency" to include any person who engages in the business of buying or selling livestock, on a commission or other fee basis, through the use of online, video, or other electronic methods. The term "marketing agency" does not include a person whose annual average of online, video, or electronic sales of livestock, on a commission or other fee basis, is less than $250,000.
(Sec. 3) The bill also permits electronic funds transfers and other expeditious payment methods that the Department of Agriculture determines to be appropriate to be used as options for meeting prompt payment requirements for livestock purchases.
People & committees
Rep. Rouzer, David [R-NC-7] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 114-237.
Became Public Law No: 114-237.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6256)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6256)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
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 H5874)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5874)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5883.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5874-5875)
Mr. Rouzer moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 601.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Agriculture. H. Rept. 114-768.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Agriculture. H. Rept. 114-768.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.5883 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.5883 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.5883 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.5883 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.