PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 17, 1997
Amends Federal law to direct the Bureau of Indian Affairs, not more than six months before rent for a residential leasehold of restricted Indian lands is established or raised, to contract with an independent appraiser (who holds a current general membership designation from the Appraisal Institute) to prepare a report on: (1) the estimated annual market rent of the leasehold; (2) the value of the leased fee and the leasehold interest; and (3) the equity position of the lease parties. Authorizes the lessee, the lessor, or the Secretary of the Interior to elect to submit a dispute regarding a residential lease of restricted Indian lands to binding arbitration. Directs that the administrative costs of an arbitration shall be shared equally by the lessee and the lessor. Directs the Secretary, prior to approving a residential lease or the assignment of a residential lease of restricted Indian lands, to ensure that all applicable State laws relating to disclosure on real estate transactions have been complied with, including disclosure of the nature and amount of any present or proposed assessments or taxes.
People & committees
Rep. Metcalf, Jack [R-WA-2] · R–WA
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 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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.1386 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.1386 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.1386 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.1386 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.