PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 108-319.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Sep 15, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 to extend, until September 30, 2007, the term of the Forest Counties Payments Committee.
People & committees
Rep. Walden, Greg [R-OR-2] · R–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 108-319.
Became Public Law No: 108-319.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9330)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9330)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 533.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici without amendment. With written report No. 108-277.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici without amendment. With written report No. 108-277.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. Hearings held.
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 Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H9846)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9846)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3249.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9846-9847)
Mr. Saxton moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, 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 Committee on Agriculture, 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 Committee on Agriculture, 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: 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.3249 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.3249 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.3249 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.3249 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.