PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Apr 24, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House reported version is repeated here.)
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture (USDA), in any land exchange involving the conveyance of certain National Forest System land within the boundaries of Inyo National Forest in California, to accept for acquisition in such exchange certain non-federal lands in California lying outside the boundaries of the Forest, if acquiring them is desirable for National Forest System purposes.
Authorizes the Secretary to accept a cash equalization payment that exceeds 25%. Requires any such payment to be deposited into the Treasury account established under the Sisk Act and made available for the acquisition of land for addition to the System.
Prohibits anything in this Act from being construed as granting the Secretary new land exchange authority. States that this Act modifies the use of land exchange authorities already available to the Secretary as of the enactment of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. McKeon, Howard P. "Buck" [R-CA-25] · R–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 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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 376 - 2 (Roll no. 178). (text: CR H2046)
House roll call 178 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 376 - 2 (Roll no. 178).(text: CR H2046)
House roll call 178 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2051)
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. 2157.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2046-2047)
Mr. Bishop (UT) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 306.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-439.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-439.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public 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.
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.2157 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.2157 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.2157 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.2157 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.