PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 889.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Sep 29, 2000
Kern County California Land Exchange Act of 2000 - Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to convey to Kern County, California, four parcels of land (known as Camp Owen, Wofford Heights Park, the French Gulch maintenance yard, and Kernville Fish Hatchery) under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service in Kern County in exchange for: (1) approximately 52 acres of Greenhorn Mountain Park in Kern County for inclusion in Sequoia National Forest; (2) a replacement storage facility (for the French Gulch maintenance yard facility) at the Greenhorn Ranger District Lake Isabella Maintenance Yard property; and (3) a cash equalization payment specified by the Secretary.
People & committees
Rep. Thomas, William M. [R-CA-21] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 889.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski under authority of the order of the Senate of 09/28/2000 with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 106-444.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski under authority of the order of the Senate of 09/28/2000 with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 106-444.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Committee consideration held.
Subcommittee on Forests and Public Land Management. 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 H1132-1133)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H1132-1133)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1680.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1132-1134)
Mr. Hansen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 285.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-510.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-510.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health.
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.1680 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.1680 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.1680 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.1680 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.