PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 23, 1993
Defense Reuse Community Partnership Act - Authorizes the Secretary of Defense, in order to fulfill responsibilities under the base closure laws, to contract with independent entities (site managers) for the management of site planning, approval, preparation, and disposal of excess and surplus real property at military installations to be closed or realigned under a base closure law. Prohibits each site manager chosen, during the term of the contract and five years thereafter, from bidding on or acquiring any real property located at such installation. Outlines site manager qualifications and general duties. Requires the appraisal of each proposed sale parcel at each such military installation. Directs a site manager and the Secretary to develop a detailed budget for each phase of the site preparation and approval process for each installation. Directs the site manager to sell site parcels after obtaining all required approvals. Divides the sale proceeds between the Department of Defense, the site manager, and appropriate local authorities in a specified priority. Requires certain reports.
People & committees
Rep. Fazio, Vic [D-CA-3] · 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 DOD.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1878-1879)
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
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 26, 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.2719 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.2719 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.2719 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.2719 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.