PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 19, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on April 16, 2012. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Gila Bend Indian Reservation Lands Replacement Clarification Act - Amends the Gila Bend Indian Reservation Lands Replacement Act to prohibit class II or III gaming activities on lands located north of latitude 33 degrees, 4 minutes north that the Tohono O'odham Nation was authorized to purchase in Arizona in exchange for granting the federal government all right, title, and interest to the Gila Bend Indian Reservation.
Prohibits this gaming restriction from having any effect on any decision as to whether any lands located south of latitude 33 degrees, 4 minutes north and taken into trust pursuant to this Act qualify as lands taken into trust as part of a land claim settlement for purposes of determining whether gaming may be conducted on such lands.
People & committees
Rep. Franks, Trent [R-AZ-2] · R–AZ
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 Indian Affairs.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 343 - 78, 2 Present (Roll no. 388). (text: CR 6/19/2012 H3725)
House roll call 388 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 343 - 78, 2 Present (Roll no. 388).(text: CR 6/19/2012 H3725)
House roll call 388 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3787)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2938.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3725-3729)
Mr. Young (AK) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 307.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-440.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-440.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 32 - 11.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Indian and Alaska Native Affairs Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee Indian and Alaska Native Affairs.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.2938 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.2938 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.2938 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.2938 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.