Bipartisan Sportsmen's Act of 2016
Latest action. Placed on Senate legislative calendarThe list of measures reported out of committee and eligible for floor action. Being on the calendar is not a promise of a vote.Read the full definition (opens a new tab) under General Orders. Calendar No. 371.
Bipartisan Sportsmen's Act of 201 6
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Toxic Substances Control Act to add articles of sport fishing equipment to the list of products that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is prohibited from regulating under such Act.
(Sec. 3) The bill amends the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to facilitate the construction and expansion of public target ranges by: (1) authorizing a state to pay up to 90% of the costs of acquiring land for expanding or constructing a public target range; (2) authorizing a state to elect to allocate 10% of a specified amount apportioned to it from the federal aid to wildlife restoration fund for these costs; (3) limiting the federal share of those costs under such Act to 90%; and (4) requiring amounts provided for those costs under such Act to remain available for expenditure and obligation for 5 fiscal years.
The U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management are urged to cooperate with state and local authorities and other entities to carry out waste removal and other activities on any federal land used as a public target range to encourage its continued use for target practice or marksmanship training.
(Sec. 4) The bill amends the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 to direct the Department of the Interior to issue a permit for the importation of a polar bear part (other than an internal organ) from a bear taken in a sport hunt in Canada to any permit applicant who has submitted proof that the polar bear was: (1) legally harvested by the applicant before the May 15, 2008, listing of the polar bear as threatened, and (2) harvested from an approved polar bear population. Interior must issue these permits without regard to limits on importing marine mammals with depleted populations.
(Sec. 5) The bill amends the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to revise standards for determining what constitutes baiting for purposes of the prohibition on taking migratory game birds. A baited area, in the case of waterfowl, cranes, and coots includes a standing, unharvested crop that has been manipulated through activities such as mowing, discing, or rolling, unless the activities are normal agricultural practices. An area is not considered to be a baited area if it: (1) has been treated with a normal agricultural practice, (2) has standing crops that have not been manipulated, or (3) has standing crops that have been or are flooded.
The summary continues for 27 more paragraphs. Read it in full on Congress.gov
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Reported to Senate with amendment(s)" stage on February 24, 2016. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on February 24, 2016: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 371.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the Senate
- Passage by the House
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 114th Congress (2015-16), 329 of the 10,233 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 3.2 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
Dan Sullivan (R-AK) introduced it on March 4, 2015. No cosponsors are recorded.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on March 4, 2015, 4208 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 3851 days ago, on February 24, 2016.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 114th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2017 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- SenateIn committee, no floor vote yet
- HouseAwaits Senate passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers