PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-119.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Nov 2, 1999
Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River Mongaup Visitor Center Act of 1999 - Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, subject to the availability of appropriations, to: (1) enter into a 99-year lease with the State of New York for State-owned land within the boundaries of the Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River located at an area known as Mongaup near the confluence of the Mongaup and Upper Delaware Rivers in New York; and (2) construct and operate a visitor center on such land.Amends the National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978 to extend the Upper Delaware Citizens Advisory Council for an additional ten years.
People & committees
Rep. Gilman, Benjamin A. [R-NY-20] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-119.
Became Public Law No: 106-119.
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.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
The committee amendment was withdrawn by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S15158)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 367.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with an amendment. With written report No. 106-211.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with an amendment. With written report No. 106-211.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
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 Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H9853)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9853)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 20.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9853-9854)
Mr. Sherwood moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 204.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-361.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-361.
Ordered to be Reported 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 National Park Service for comments.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E25)
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.20 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.20 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.20 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.20 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.