Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the policy of the United States on wild animals at the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 12, 2010
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that the U.S. delegation to the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora should: (1) continue to support its proposal to move the polar bear from Appendix II of the Convention (species not necessarily threatened with extinction but may become so unless trade is closely controlled) to Appendix I (species are threatened with extinction); (2) withdraw its proposal to remove the bobcat from Appendix II; (3) continue to support its proposals to include the scalloped hammerhead, great hammerhead, smooth hammerhead, sandbar, dusky, and whitetip sharks in Appendix II; (4) support Palau and Sweden's proposals to include the spiny dogfishes and porbeagle sharks in Appendix II; (5) support Monaco's proposal to include the bluefin tuna in Appendix I; and (6) support protection of African elephants by opposing proposals to downlist them from Appendix I to Appendix II as well as one-time ivory sale proposals.
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
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.Res.1180 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.Res.1180 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.Res.1180 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.Res.1180 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.