PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 114-496.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 16, 2015
National Liberty Memorial Clarification Act of 2015
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 with respect to submission of site and design proposals by the National Mall Liberty Fund D.C. (sponsor) for the National Liberty Memorial to honor the slaves and free black persons who served as soldiers and sailors or provided civilian assistance during the American Revolution.
The site and design approval process is revised to make the Department of Agriculture, rather than the Department of the Interior or the General Services Administration, responsible for consideration of these site and design proposals and their submission, on behalf of the sponsor, to the Commission of Fine Arts and National Capital Planning Commission.
People & committees
Rep. Butterfield, G. K. [D-NC-1] · D–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 114-496.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 402 - 0 (Roll no. 496). (text: CR H5998)
House roll call 496 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 402 - 0 (Roll no. 496).(text: CR H5998)
House roll call 496 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6004-6005)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1949.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5998-6000)
Mr. McClintock moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 191.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 114-252.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 114-252.
Subcommittee on Federal Lands Discharged.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
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.
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.1949 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.1949 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.1949 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.1949 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.