PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 10, 2001
Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor Protection Act 2001 - Amends the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor Act of 1994 to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to assist in the implementation of the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor management plan by undertaking a limited program of financial assistance to the Corridor's management entity for the purpose of providing funds for: (1) the protection and restoration of resources necessary to the maintenance of the distinctive character of the Corridor; and (2) development of necessary infrastructure for the interpretation of and public access to such resources.
People & committees
Rep. Simmons, Rob [R-CT-2] · R–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1298)
Referred to the House Committee on 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: Aug 19, 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.2452 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.2452 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.2452 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.2452 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.