PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 109-441.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 21, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the Senate on July 31, 2006. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Directs the Secretary of the Interior to create a program within the National Park Service to support and work in partnership with citizens, governmental and tribal organizations, educational institutions, and private nonprofit organizations for the purpose of identifying, protecting, and acquiring historic confinement sites where Japanese Americans were detained during World War II in order to gain inspiration from these sites and to demonstrate the nation's commitment to equal justice.
Directs the Secretary, after consultation with state, local, and tribal governments, other public entities, educational institutions, and private nonprofit organizations, to develop criteria for making grants to those entities (and only in accordance with such criteria) to assist in carrying out the actions described above.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Permits the use of federal funds made available under this Act for the acquisition of of non-federal property for the purposes of this Act only if that property is within specified areas.
Declares that the authority granted in this Act shall not constitute a federal designation or have any effect on private property ownership.
Requires a 50% non-federal match for funds provided under this Act.
Terminates the force and effect of this Act two years after the disbursement to grantees of the total amount of funds authorized to be appropriated under this Act.
Prohibits any federal funds made available to carry out this Act from being used to acquire any real property or an interest in any real property without the owner's written consent.
Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Thomas, William M. [R-CA-22] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 109-441.
Became Public Law No: 109-441.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H8698)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H8698)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments to H.R. 1492.
Mr. Radanovich moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments. (consideration: CR H8698-8700)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11105; text as passed Senate: CR S11105)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11105; text as passed Senate: CR S11105)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 557.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici with amendments. With written report No. 109-314.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici with amendments. With written report No. 109-314.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 H10321)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H10321)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1492.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10321-10326)
Mr. Gohmert moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 84.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-142.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-142.
Subcommittee on National Parks Discharged.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks.
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.
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.1492 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.1492 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.1492 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.1492 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.