PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 15, 2003
Nevada National Forest Land Disposal Act of 2003 - Requires the Secretary of Agriculture to sell at public auction any right, title, or interest of the United States in and to specified parcels of National Forest System lands in Carson City and Douglas County, Nevada. Requires the Secretary to coordinate such sales with the relevant unit of local government. Provides that the sale of such land shall be subject to existing rights in effect on the date of sale.
Sets forth percentages of the gross proceeds from sales under this Act that shall be earmarked for: (1) the State of Nevada general education program; (2) the Carson Water Subconservancy District in Nevada; (3) the fund established in the Sisk Act, to be used for land sales costs and for the development and maintenance of parks, trails, and natural areas in specified Nevada counties; and (4) expansion of the Minden Interagency Dispatch Center in Minden, Nevada.
Declares that the lands authorized to be sold under this Act shall not be subject to specified Federal law pertaining to property management.
People & committees
Rep. Gibbons, Jim [R-NV-2] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H9407-9408)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9407-9408)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1092.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9407-9409)
Mr. Pombo moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 170.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-294.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-294.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health Discharged.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
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 H.R.1092 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 H.R.1092 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 H.R.1092 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 H.R.1092 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.