Idaho Land Exchange Act of 1993 - Adjusts the boundaries of the Targhee National Forest in Idaho. Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to convey to Idaho, acting through the Regents of its University, the Clark Fork Ranger Station within the Kaniksu National Forest in exchange for Idaho conveying to the Secretary the Clark Fork Land Exchange. Provides that if the lands exchanged between the United States and Idaho are not of equal value, the values shall be equalized in accordance with provisions of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, except that the value of the improvements made by the University on the Clark Fork Ranger Station under the Granger-Thye permit shall be excluded from consideration in such valuation. Adjusts the boundaries of the Kaniksu National Forest to include the lands conveyed by Idaho.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Specialty Crops and Natural Resources.
Referred sequentially to the House Committee on Agriculture for a period ending not later than March 26, 1993 for consideration of such provisions of the bill as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee pursuant to clause 1)(a), rule X.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-42, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-42, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA.
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
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.235 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.235 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.235 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.235 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.