PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 20, 1999
Lincoln Highway Study Act of 1999 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service, to coordinate a comprehensive study of routes comprising the Lincoln Highway. Requires that such study: (1) include an evaluation of its significance in American history, options for the preservation and use of remaining segments of the highway, and options for the preservation and interpretation of significant features association with such highway; and (2) consider private sector preservation alternatives. Directs that the study provide for the participation of representatives from each State traversed by such highway, State historic preservation offices, representatives of associations interested in its preservation, and persons knowledgeable in American history, historic preservation, and popular culture. Sets forth reporting requirements. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Regula, Ralph [R-OH-16] · R–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-563.
Became Public Law No: 106-563.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11822)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11822)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H9961)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9961)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2570.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9961-9962)
Mr. Calvert moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 547.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-912.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-912.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to Department of the Interior for comments.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
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: Apr 7, 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.2570 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.2570 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.2570 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.2570 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.