PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 5, 1993
Directs the Secretary of Defense, before any action is taken with respect to the disposal or transfer of real property or facilities located at military bases to be closed or realigned, to: (1) identify all areas and facilities that are of exceptional natural or historic character; and (2) transfer such areas and facilities, upon request, to the Secretary of the Interior for inclusion in the National Park System or the Secretary of Agriculture for inclusion in the National Forest System or, in the absence of a request, to the appropriate State or local government if such government agrees to preserve such areas and facilities as a park, historic site, or recreational area. Makes conforming amendments to the Defense Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and Realignment Act and the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990.
People & committees
Rep. Jacobs, Andrew, Jr. [D-IN-10] · D–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
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: Jun 6, 2025. 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.202 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.202 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.202 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.202 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.