PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 7, 1995
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Disposal of Lands in Oklahoma Title II: Washita Battlefield National Historic Site Title I: Disposal of Lands in Oklahoma - Provides for the sale of the Black Kettle and the Rita Blanca National Grasslands, Oklahoma, and certain lands surrounding Optima Lake, North Canadian River basin, Oklahoma. Grants right of first refusal to the original owners or their descendants. Directs the Secretary of Agriculture, upon request of Oklahoma, to transfer to the Oklahoma Department of Tourism and Recreation certain lands in Rogers Mills County, Oklahoma. Title II: Washita Battlefield National Historic Site - Washita Battlefield National Historic Site Act of 1995 - Establishes the Washita Battlefield National Historic Site in Oklahoma to provide for the preservation and interpretation of the Battle of the Washita. Directs the Secretary of the Interior, through the National Park Service, to consult, and authorizes cooperative agreements with, the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribe, in developing a management plan and public educational programs. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-6] · R–OK
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 Water Resources and Environment.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Resource Conservation, Research and Forestry.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Agriculture, and Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Agriculture, and Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Agriculture, and Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committees on Agriculture, and Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: 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.2736 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.2736 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.2736 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.2736 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.