PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 7, 1997
Amends the National Historic Preservation Act to prohibit unimproved or unmodified natural landscape features that do not contain artifacts or other physical evidence of human activity or have unique significance in history or pre-history as established by or pursuant to an Act of Congress from being: (1) eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places or designation as a National Historic Landmark; (2) included on the Register or designated as such Landmark; or (3) considered to be a historic or pre-historic property or historic resource for purposes of the Act or other Federal laws. Provides that nothing in this Act shall invalidate or otherwise affect determinations made before this Act's enactment with respect to any natural landscape feature. Prohibits the Mt. Shasta area in California from being designated by any U.S. agency or authority as a historic district, historic site, or national monument under the Act or the Antiquities Act. Ceases the force and effect of any inconsistent designation made before enactment of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Herger, Wally [R-CA-2] · R–CA
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 Subcommittee on National Parks 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: 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.193 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.193 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.193 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.193 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.