PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 26, 2003
Amends the Graton Rancheria Restoration Act to specify that no land taken into trust for the benefit of the Graton Rancheria Tribe of California shall be construed to satisfy the terms of an exception in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act to the prohibition of gaming on lands acquired by the Secretary of the Interior after October 17, 1988 as: (1) part of a settlement of a land claim; (2) the initial reservation of an Indian tribe acknowledged by the Secretary under the Federal acknowledgment process; or (3) Indian tribe lands that are restored to Federal recognition.
Changes from mandatory to discretionary the Secretary's authority to accept real property located in Marin or Sonoma County, California, into trust for the benefit of the Tribe after the property is transferred to the Secretary.
People & committees
Rep. Woolsey, Lynn C. [D-CA-6] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
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.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.2656 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.2656 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.2656 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.2656 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.