Text: H.Res.230 — 107th Congress (2001-2002)All Information (Except Text)

There is one version of the bill.

Text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip?

Shown Here:
Introduced in House (08/02/2001)

 
[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
[H. Res. 230 Introduced in House (IH)]







107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 230

 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Article I, 
  section 10 of the United States Constitution should not be used to 
   renew the interstate economic protectionism of our Nation's early 
                                history.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 2, 2001

 Mr. Sessions (for himself, Mr. Hayworth, Mr. Flake, Mr. Shadegg, Mr. 
Kolbe, Mr. Royce, Mr. Tancredo, Mr. Miller of Florida, Mr. Nussle, Mr. 
    Manzullo, Mr. Hyde, Mr. Johnson of Illinois, Mrs. Biggert, Mr. 
Hostettler, Mr. Gutknecht, Mr. Thune, Mr. Paul, Mr. Bonilla, Mr. Green 
 of Wisconsin, Mr. Stump, Mr. Radanovich, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Otter, Mr. 
Weller, Mr. Souder, Mr. Boehner, Mr. Petri, Mr. Sensenbrenner, Mr. Ryan 
 of Wisconsin, Mr. Kennedy of Minnesota, Mr. Culberson, Mr. Issa, Mr. 
 Latham, Mr. Leach, Mr. Ganske, Mr. Shimkus, Mr. Crane, Mr. Skeen, Mr. 
Rohrabacher, Mr. Dooley of California, Mr. Rush, Mr. Davis of Illinois, 
 Mr. Costello, Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Mr. Stupak, Mr. Oberstar, Mr. 
 Sabo, Mr. Traficant, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Barrett of Wisconsin, Mr. Kind, 
    Mr. Obey, Mr. Kleczka, and Mr. Phelps) submitted the following 
    resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Article I, 
  section 10 of the United States Constitution should not be used to 
   renew the interstate economic protectionism of our Nation's early 
                                history.

Whereas in consenting to the Northeast Interstate Dairy Compact in 1997, 
        Congress undermined the fundamental Constitutional principle of one 
        nationwide market free from interstate barriers;
Whereas recent use of Article I, section 10 of the United States Constitution 
        with regard to national dairy policy has renewed the interstate economic 
        protectionism of our Nation's early history;
Whereas fashioning a national dairy policy supporting United States dairy 
        producers without promoting interstate regionalism is in the National 
        interest;
Whereas the Northeast Interstate Dairy Compact has cost consumers in New England 
        more than $140,000,000 in higher milk prices, harming those who can 
        least afford it;
Whereas if compacts were to be expanded to the mid-Atlantic, South, 
        intermountain and Pacific Northwest regions, consumers would pay more 
        than $2,000,000,000 in higher milk prices;
Whereas according to a 1999 University of Missouri study, dairy producers 
        outside of existing and proposed compact regions stand to lose between 
        16 and 21 cents per hundredweight of milk;
Whereas the Northeast Interstate Dairy Compact promotes the overproduction of 
        Class I milk; and
Whereas the Northeast Interstate Dairy Compact is the only congressionally 
        authorized interstate compact providing economic protectionism: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Northeast Interstate Dairy Compact should be 
allowed to expire under its own terms on September 30, 2001.
                                 <all>

Share This