PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 5, 2004
Pennsylvania National Forest Improvement Act of 2004 - (Sec. 2) Authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to sell or exchange certain National Forest System lands and administrative sites in the Allegheny National Forest, Pennsylvania, and to accept a cash equalization payment in excess of 25 percent of the value of the land exchanged.
(Sec. 3) Authorizes the Secretary to convey to the Warren County, Pennsylvania Development Association, U.S. Tract 770, Sheffield Ranger District Headquarters for a lump sum payment of $100,000.
(Sec. 4) Authorizes the Secretary to convey to Ridgeway Township, Pennsylvania, U.S. Tract 904, Ridgeway Ranger District Headquarters, as depicted on specified Allegheny Unit maps.
(Sec. 5) Authorizes the Secretary to convey, without consideration, to the Marienville Volunteer Fire Department of Forest County, Pennsylvania, U.S. Tract 844, Marienville Ranger Residence.
(Sec. 6) Requires the Secretary to deposit in a Sisk Fund amounts received from the sale or exchange of land under this Act and to use such funds for administrative facilities and sites for the Allegheny National Forest or the acquisition of land in the Allegheny National Forest.
People & committees
Rep. Peterson, John E. [R-PA-5] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H8113-8114)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H8113-8114)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3514.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8113-8115)
Mr. Goodlatte moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry discharged..
Ordered to be Reported.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
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.3514 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.3514 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.3514 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.3514 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.