PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Indefinitely postponed by Senate by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5530)
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 22, 2007
Amends the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2000 to revise the administrative authorities of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial Commission.
Authorizes the Commission to: (1) enter into contracts for specialized or professional services without regard to certain civil service requirements; (2) accept gifts of real or personal property; (3) appoint an architect; (4) hire and fire staff without regard to competitive service requirements and obtain temporary, intermittent, and part-time services; (5) enter into cooperative agreements with other government and private entities; and (6) accept volunteer services.
Requires the Commission to: (1) appoint an Executive Director; and (2) obtain adminstrative and support services from the General Services Administration.
Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Moore, Dennis [D-KS-3] · D–KS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Indefinitely postponed by Senate by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5530)
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 436.
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 H11787-11788)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H11787-11788)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2094.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11787-11789)
Mr. Grijalva moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 246.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-392.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-392.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Discharged.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E900-901)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 15, 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.2094 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.2094 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.2094 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.2094 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.