PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock and Horticulture.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Jul 10, 2002
Sudden Oak Death Syndrome Control Act of 2002 - Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct sudden oak death syndrome programs of: (1) research, monitoring, and treatment; (2) management and fire prevention; and (3) outreach and education.Directs the Secretary to establish a Sudden Oak Death Syndrome Advisory Committee.Authorizes FY 2002 through 2007 appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] · D–CA
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 Livestock and Horticulture.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation, Credit, Rural Development and Research.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S6593-6594)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S6593-6594)
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6593-6594)
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6593-6594)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5976-5977)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5976)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Mar 21, 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.997 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.997 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.997 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.997 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.