PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to refer the bill and the accompanying veto message to the Committee on Resources. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 11, 1996
Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge Eminent Domain Prevention Act - Amends the Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge Act to allow acquisition of lands in New Hampshire and Vermont for purposes of the Act only with the consent of the owner of the lands.
People & committees
Rep. Bass, Charles F. [R-NH-2] · R–NH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to refer the bill and the accompanying veto message to the Committee on Resources. Agreed to without objection.
Mr. Solomon moved to refer the bill and accompanying veto message to the Committee on Resources.
The Chair laid before the House the veto message from the President.
Vetoed by President. (consideration: CR 10/3/1996 H12267)
Vetoed by President.(consideration: CR 10/3/1996 H12267)
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S10892)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S10892)
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 517.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported to Senate by Senator Chafee without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported to Senate by Senator Chafee without amendment. Without written report.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by voice vote.
The previous question was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House resumed debate.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Considered from the Corrections Calendar. (consideration: CR H6127-6132)
Called up from the Corrections Calendar for consideration.
Placed on the Corrections Calendar, Calendar No. 17.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 286.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-579.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-579.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Executive Comment Received from Interior.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans.
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: 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.2909 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.2909 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.2909 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.2909 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.