PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendments to Senate bill.
Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Sep 30, 1998
Wetlands and Wildlife Enhancement Act of 1998 - Amends the North American Wetlands Conservation Act and the Partnerships for Wildlife Act to extend the authorization of appropriations to carry out such Acts through FY 2003. Revises the composition of the North American Wetlands Conservation Council during FY 1999 through 2002 to include: (1) the Group Manager for Conservation Programs of Ducks Unlimited, Inc.; and (2) two (currently, three) individuals appointed by the Secretary of the Interior who represent charitable and nonprofit organizations participating in wetlands conservation projects. Requires the Secretary to publish a policy in the Federal Register for making appointments to the Council from such organizations.
People & committees
Sen. Chafee, John H. [R-RI] · R–RI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendments to Senate bill.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
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.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10473-10475)
Mr. Young (AK) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S11191-11193)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 417.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported to Senate by Senator Chafee without amendment. With written report No. 105-218.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported to Senate by Senator Chafee without amendment. With written report No. 105-218.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1010-1011)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.1677 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 S.1677 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 S.1677 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 S.1677 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.