PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 16, 2012
Amends Public Law 99-548, commonly known as the Mesquite Lands Act of 1986 (the Act), to require proceeds from sales in the fourth area to be used for the implementation of a multispecies habitat conservation plan for the Virgin River in Clark County, Nevada, including any associated groundwater monitoring plan.
Extends, until November 29, 2020, withdrawal and purchase authority with respect to the fifth and sixth areas.
Amends the Act to provide for the conveyance to the city of Mesquite, Nevada, of the approximately 218 acres of land identified as Hiatus on the map entitled "Mesquite Airport Conveyance " and dated January 13, 2012, from among the up to 2,560 acres of public land to be selected by the city from the sixth area.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends the Act to require, if the public land conveyed to the city of Mesquite from the sixth area is not being used by the city as an airport or for another public purpose, such land to revert to the United States, at the option of the Secretary of the Interior, except that the city shall have an exclusive right to purchase the land.
Grants the city of Mesquite, until November 29, 2020, the exclusive right to purchase the parcels of public land from the sixth area that the Secretary did not convey to the city pursuant to the Act.
Requires the proceeds from the sale of each parcel to be deposited into the General Treasury.
People & committees
Rep. Heck, Joseph J. [R-NV-3] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 5/15/2012 H2680)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 5/15/2012 H2680)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2745)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Heinrich objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2745.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2680-2681)
Mr. Bishop (UT) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 332.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-474.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-474.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural 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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.2745 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.2745 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.2745 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.2745 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.