PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (text of measure as introduced: CR 6/30/2000 S6284-6287)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 29, 2000
Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act of 2000 - Title I: Reauthorization and Revision - Amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to: (1) extend its authorization of appropriations through FY 2005; (2) express congressional policy to use the best scientific information available when making fishery management and conservation decisions; (3) establish operating procedures and peer review for each scientific and statistical committee assisting regional fishery councils; (4) require the Secretary of Commerce to take certain action upon a determination that a fishery is being overfished; (5) require the appropriate regional fishery council or Secretary to establish a set of goals and objectives for observers on fishing vessels or in fish processing plants; (6) require fishery management plans to describe and identify essential fish habitat and areas of particular concern for a fishery; and (7) require the Secretary to make a preliminary evaluation of a management plan or amendment to determine if it is consistent with national standards.Directs the Secretary to establish a national cooperative research and management program between fishing industry participants, the affected States, and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Authorizes appropriations. Provides for cooperative enforcement agreements.Requires each scientific and statistical committee to report to the Secretary on research needs to support ecosystem-based management of its fisheries.Title II: Shark Conservation - Prohibits the practice of taking shark fins, as well as the landing of shark fins taken by shark-finning. Directs the Secretary to undertake: (1) international negotiations to prevent such practices; and (2) certain import restrictions in order to protect highly migratory sharks.
People & committees
Sen. Snowe, Olympia J. [R-ME] · R–ME
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (text of measure as introduced: CR 6/30/2000 S6284-6287)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6142-6143)
Introduced in Senate
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: 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.2832 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.2832 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.2832 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.2832 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.