PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 27, 2006
Commission to Study the Potential Creation of a National Museum of American Latino Heritage Act of 2006 - Establishes the Commission to Study the Potential Creation of a National Museum of American Latino Heritage to report its recommendations with respect to developing a plan of action for the establishment and maintenance of a National Museum of the American Latino Heritage in Washington, D.C.
Requires the Commission to develop a fund-raising plan for supporting the creation and maintenance of the Museum through contributions by the American people, and a separate plan on fund-raising by the American Latino community.
Instructs the Commission to examine and report on: (1) the availability and cost of collections to be acquired and housed in the Museum; (2) the impact of the Museum on regional Hispanic- and Latino-related museums; (3) possible locations for the Museum in Washington, D.C.; (4) whether the Museum should be located within the Smithsonian Institution; (5) the governance and organizational structure from which the Museum should operate; (6) how to engage the American Latino community in the development and design of the Museum; and (7) the cost of constructing, operating, and maintaining the Museum.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Commission, based on the recommendations contained in the reports described above, to submit for consideration to specified congressional committees recommendations for a legislative plan of action to create and construct the Museum.
Authorizes the Commission to convene a national conference on the Museum, which shall be comprised of individuals committed to the advancement of American Latino life, art, history, and culture.
Instructs the Department of the Interior to provide from funds appropriated for this purpose administrative services, facilities, and funds necessary for the performance of the Commission's functions. Makes such funds available prior to any meetings of the Commission.
Excepts the Commission from application of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Becerra, Xavier [D-CA-31] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
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 H7664-7665)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7664-7665)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2134.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7664-7667)
Mr. Gohmert moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 406.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 109-584, Part II.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 109-584, Part II.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
House Committee on House Administration Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 29, 2006.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-584, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-584, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.2134 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.2134 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.2134 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.2134 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.