PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 112-157.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Aug 10, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act to revise tribal membership requirements to provide tribal membership to any person of Tigua Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Indian blood enrolled by the tribe.
People & committees
Rep. Reyes, Silvestre [D-TX-16] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-157.
Became Public Law No: 112-157.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5894)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S5894)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 480.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Akaka without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Akaka without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 112-635.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 12/05/2011 H8132)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 12/05/2011 H8132)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8245)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Lujan objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1560.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8131-8132)
Mr. Hastings (WA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 144.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-222.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-222.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Indian and Alaska Native Affairs Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee Indian and Alaska Native Affairs.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural 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: Jun 20, 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.1560 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.1560 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.1560 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.1560 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.