PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Jul 25, 2019
U.S. Senator Joseph D. Tydings Memorial Prevent All Soring Tactics Act of 2019 or the PAST Act
This bill addresses the practice of soring horses. The soring of horses includes various actions taken on horses' limbs to produce higher gaits that may cause pain, distress, inflammation, or lameness.
Specifically, the bill expands soring regulation and enforcement at horse shows, exhibitions, sales, and auctions, including by establishing a new system for inspecting horses for soring.
The Department of Agriculture (USDA) must license, train, assign, and oversee persons for hire by the management of horse shows, exhibitions, sales, or auctions to detect and diagnose sore horses. A license may not be issued to a person with conflicts of interest, and USDA must give preference to veterinarians. USDA may revoke a license for unsatisfactory performance.
In addition, the bill increases penalties for violations. USDA may disqualify (1) violators from specified activities related to horse shows, exhibitions, sales, and auctions; and (2) a horse that is sore from being shown or exhibited.
People & committees
Rep. Schrader, Kurt [D-OR-5] · D–OR
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 Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 333 - 96 (Roll no. 510). (text: CR 7/24/2019 H7368-7369)
House roll call 510 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 333 - 96 (Roll no. 510).(text: CR 7/24/2019 H7368-7369)
House roll call 510 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7397-7398)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 693.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7368-7374)
Mr. Schrader moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
The Chair announced the Speaker's designation, pursuant to clause 7(a)(1) of rule 15, of H.R. 693 as the measure on the Consensus Calendar to be considered this week.
Assigned to the Consensus Calendar, Calendar No. 3.
Motion to place bill on Consensus Calendar filed by Mr. Schrader.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and Commerce.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.693 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.693 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.693 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.693 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.