PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 27, 2003
Federal Lands Improvement Act of 2003 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to dispose of all public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that, as of the enactment date of this Act, have been identified for disposal under the Federal land use planning process under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. Requires the disposal of at least one- third of such lands before the end of the next three years, two-thirds before the end of the next five years, and all such lands within seven years.Prohibits the disposal of: (1) lands located in wilderness areas or wilderness study areas; and (2) parcels of land if the cost of disposal exceeds the amount that would be received for such parcels.Requires the disposal of such public lands in parcels of 160 acres or less.Requires one-third of the proceeds to be deposited in a separate account established by this Act, one-third to be paid to the county in which the lands are located, and one-third to be deposited in the Treasury's general fund and utilized for reducing the public debt. Requires the separate account to be available to the Secretary for paying, subject to specified limitations: (1) costs incurred by the BLM in arranging the disposals; (2) the cost of acquisition from a willing seller of environmentally sensitive land in States in which such public lands are located; (3) the cost of carrying out any necessary revision or amendment of a current BLM land use plan that relates to such public lands; (4) the cost of projects or programs to restore or protect wetlands, riparian areas, or cultural, historic, prehistoric, or paleontological resources on public lands, including petroglyphs; and (5) the cost of projects, programs, or land acquisition to stabilize or restore water quality for water located or used on public lands.
People & committees
Rep. Duncan, John J., Jr. [R-TN-2] · R–TN
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, Recreation 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: Aug 18, 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.353 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.353 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.353 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.353 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.