PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 9, 1995
Historically Black Colleges and Universities Historic Building Restoration and Preservation Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to administer a program of grants-in-aid, from amounts authorized to be appropriated to carry out the National Historic Preservation Act for FY 1996 through 1999, to eligible historically black colleges and universities for the preservation and restoration of historic buildings and structures on their campuses. Requires a grantee to covenant, for the period of time specified by the Secretary, that: (1) no alteration will be made in the property with respect to which the grant is made without the concurrence of the Secretary; and (2) reasonable public access will be permitted to such property for interpretive and educational purposes. Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) obligate funds for a grant with respect to a building or structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places only if the grantee agrees to match the amount of such grant with funds derived from non-Federal sources; and (2) waive this matching requirement if an extreme emergency exists or if such a waiver is in the public interest to assure the preservation of historically significant resources. Earmarks funds for FY 1996 for grants to: (1) Fisk University; (2) Knoxville College; and (3) historically black colleges and universities identified for inclusion in the Department of the Interior Historically Black College and University Historic Preservation Initiative.
People & committees
Rep. Clement, Bob [D-TN-5] · D–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
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.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9972-9974)
Mr. Doolittle moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 404.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-758.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-758.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands.
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: Aug 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 H.R.1179 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.1179 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.1179 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.1179 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.