PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 6, 2017
Condemns the Dog Meat Festival in Yulin, China, because it: (1) is a spectacle of extreme animal cruelty, (2) is a commercial activity not grounded in Chinese history, (3) is opposed by a majority of the Chinese people, and (4) threatens global public health.
Urges:
the government of China and the Yulin authorities to ban the killing and eating of dogs as part of Yulin's festival and to enforce China's food safety laws regulating the processing and sale of animal products and the 2011 Agriculture Ministry of China Regulation on the Quarantine of Dogs at the Place of Origin requiring one certificate for one dog on trans-provincial transport trucks, and the National People's Congress of China to enact an animal anticruelty law that bans the dog meat trade.
Affirms the commitment of the United States to the protection of animals and to the progress of animal protection.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Alcee L. [D-FL-20] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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: Jan 23, 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.Res.30 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.Res.30 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.Res.30 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.Res.30 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.