PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Apr 11, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Milk Regulatory Equity Act of 2005 - Amends the the Agricultural Adjustment Act, reenacted with amendments by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, to subject specified Class I milk handlers (including producer-handlers) to federal milk marketing order minimum and uniform price requirements applicable to the county in which the plant of the handler is located, at federal order class prices, if the handler has packaged fluid milk product route dispositions, or sales of packaged fluid milk products to other plants, in a marketing area located in a state that requires handlers to pay minimum prices for raw milk purchases.
Exempts from such provision: (1) a handler operating a nonpool plant; (2) a producer-handler for any month during which packaged fluid milk route dispositions and sales to other plants are less than three million pounds of milk; or (3) specified handlers whose fluid milk products are disposed of as route dispositions or transfers, or whose dispositions or transfers are in states requiring minimum prices for raw milk purchases.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Subjects a Class I milk handler in the Arizona-Las Vegas marketing area (Order 131) to minimum milk price requirements for any month in which the handler distributes in such area at least three million pounds of Class I products from his or her own production.
States that minimum milk price and exemption provisions under this Act shall not be construed as affecting, expanding, or contracting the treatment of producer-handlers except as provided for by such provisions.
Excludes Nevada from federal milk marketing orders.
People & committees
Sen. Kyl, Jon [R-AZ] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 109-215.
Became Public Law No: 109-215.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 285 - 128 (Roll no. 69). (text: CR H1149-1150)
House roll call 69 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 285 - 128 (Roll no. 69).(text: CR H1149-1150)
House roll call 69 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1163)
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 S. 2120.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1149-1154)
Mr. Goodlatte moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S13701-13702; text as passed Senate: CR S13702)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S13701-13702; text as passed Senate: CR S13702)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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 S.2120 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.2120 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.2120 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.2120 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.