PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-103.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 19, 1999
Authorizes the United States National Civil Defense Monument Commission to construct a monument to honor those who have served the nation's civil defense and emergency management programs. Terminates such authority seven years after the enactment of this Act, with an exception. Authorizes the Commission, subject to the approval of the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to select the monument site on FEMA lands in Emmitsburg, Maryland, and to develop the monument design. Requires monument costs to be paid from contributions to the Commission.
People & committees
Rep. Bartlett, Roscoe G. [R-MD-6] · R–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-103.
Became Public Law No: 106-103.
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 S14313)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S14313)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2261)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 349 - 4 (Roll no. 550). (text: CR H11150)
House roll call 550 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 349 - 4 (Roll no. 550).(text: CR H11150)
House roll call 550 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H11176-11177)
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. 348.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11150-11151)
Mr. Hansen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 241.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-416.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-416.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.348 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.348 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.348 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.348 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.