PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-351.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 16, 2000
Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument Act of 2000 - Designates the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument in southern California, to be managed jointly by the Secretaries of the Interior and of Agriculture.Provides that nothing in the establishment of the Monument shall be construed as: (1) affecting Indian Reservations, individually held trust lands, Indian allotments, lands or interests in lands held by the State of California or its political subdivision, a special district, or the Mount San Jacinto Winter Park Authority, or private property rights within the Monuments boundaries; nor (2) granting the Secretaries authority on or over non-Federal lands not already provided by law.Requires the Secretaries to prepare a management plan for the conservation and protection of the Monument.Provides for the continued use by the University of California of certain Federal lands within the Monument (including other specified existing and historical uses).Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, without further authorization by law, to exchange lands with the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians for purposes of this Act.Requires the Secretaries to jointly establish an advisory committee for the Monument to advise them with respect to the preparation and implementation of the management plan.Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Bono, Mary [R-CA-44] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-351.
Became Public Law No: 106-351.
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.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S10004-10005)
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S10004-10005)
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Committee consideration and Mark Up Session held.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Forests and Public Land Management. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 H6867-6869)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6867-6869)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3676.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6867-6870)
Mr. Hansen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 431.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-750.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-750.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health.
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.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.3676 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.3676 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.3676 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.3676 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.