To improve the administration of the Women's Rights National Historical Park in the State of New York, and for other purposes.

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 459.

H.R.359 through Congress

H.R.359 keeps its number as it moves between the House and Senate.

HouseJan 5, 1993IntroducedOfficial record

Major milestones in the imported record. See all actions.

No Senate action is available in our imported record yet.

Separate related Senate measures (1)

These are different measures identified as related by Congress.gov. Their text and outcomes may differ; they are not the Senate stage of H.R.359.

Related Senate bill: S.2001 A bill to improve the administration of the Women's Rights National Historical Park in the State of New York, and for other purposes.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Oct 3, 1994

Authorizes appropriations for fiscal years after September 30, 1994, for the Women's Rights National Historical Park in Seneca Falls and Waterloo, New York. Removes the Bloomer House property from the list of designated sites composing the Park.

Read the summary on Congress.gov

PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Rep. Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [D-NY-28] · D–NY

Committees

Natural Resources Committee

25 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

Oct 3, 1994
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 459.
Oct 3, 1994
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-814.
Oct 3, 1994
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-814.
Sep 28, 1994
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Sep 28, 1994
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Jul 15, 1994
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Jul 15, 1994
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Jun 21, 1994
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
May 3, 1993
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Feb 4, 1993
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Jan 5, 1993
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Jan 5, 1993
Introduced in House
Jan 5, 1993
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Reported in House · Oct 3, 1994 Formatted Text PDF
Introduced in House · Jan 5, 1993 Formatted Text PDF

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.359 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.359, 103rd Congress: To improve the administration of the Women's Rights National Historical Park in the State of New York, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/359

Text version to examine: Reported in House · 1994-10-03.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/103/bills/hr359/BILLS-103hr359rh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-02T17:22:25Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze H.R.359 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.359 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.359, 103rd Congress: To improve the administration of the Women's Rights National Historical Park in the State of New York, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/359

Text version to examine: Reported in House · 1994-10-03.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/103/bills/hr359/BILLS-103hr359rh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-02T17:22:25Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.359 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.359 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.359, 103rd Congress: To improve the administration of the Women's Rights National Historical Park in the State of New York, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/359

Text version to examine: Reported in House · 1994-10-03.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/103/bills/hr359/BILLS-103hr359rh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-02T17:22:25Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.359 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.359 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.359, 103rd Congress: To improve the administration of the Women's Rights National Historical Park in the State of New York, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/359

Text version to examine: Reported in House · 1994-10-03.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/103/bills/hr359/BILLS-103hr359rh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-02T17:22:25Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.359 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.