PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 10, 1995
Voyageurs National Park Revitalization Act of 1995 - Prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from taking any action to further the designation of any area within Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota, as wilderness. Requires the Secretary to permit access and use of motorboats, aircraft, hiking, and skiing on all major lakes and bays within the Park and at least the following interior lakes: (1) Beast; (2) Cruiser; (3) Oslo; (4) Locator; (5) War Club; (6) Quill; (7) Loiten; (8) Shoepack; (9) Little Trout; and (10) Mukooda. Permits use of snowmobiles on such major and interior lakes. Requires the Secretary to: (1) study and report to the Congress on the cost of constructing and maintaining additional cross-country ski routes, snowmobile trails, hiking trails, camp sites, and overnight ski huts to allow access to, and use of, the lakes; (2) authorize at least 200 houseboats to operate within the Park; and (3) revise the master plan for the Park to incorporate changes mandated by this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Oberstar, James L. [D-MN-8] · D–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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.1207 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.1207 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.1207 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.1207 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.