PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 1, 1996
Rural Right-of-Way Fairness Act - Amends the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 to revise the standard for determining liability of holders of rights-of-way to require any regulation or stipulation imposing liability for damage or injury to be determined by ordinary rules of negligence. (Current law requires any regulation or stipulation imposing liability without fault to include a maximum limitation on damages commensurate with the foreseeable risks of hazards presented and any liability for damage or injury in excess of such amount to be determined by ordinary rules of negligence.) Allows rights-of-way to be granted, issued, or renewed, without rental fees, for electric or telephone facilities eligible for financing pursuant to the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (REA), determined without regard to any application requirement under REA. (Current law requires the facilities to be financed pursuant to REA before being exempted from such fees.)
People & committees
Rep. Cooley, Wes [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.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E692-693)
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 21, 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.3377 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.3377 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.3377 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.3377 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.