PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Jun 20, 2002
Amends the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to make a grant to an eligible historically black college or university for the preservation and/or restoration of a building or structure listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places if the grantee agrees to provide funds derived from non-Federal sources in an amount equal to 30 percent (currently, a matching amount) of the total cost of the project. Authorizes additional appropriations for such grants.
People & committees
Rep. Clyburn, James E. [D-SC-6] · D–SC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11800)
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11800)
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 H6523)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6523)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1606.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6523-6525)
Mr. Hansen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 310.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 107-519.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 107-519.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands Discharged.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public 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: 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.1606 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.1606 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.1606 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.1606 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.