PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.For Further Action See H.R.4476.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 22, 1993
National Park System New Area Study Reform Act - Requires the Director of the National Park Service to submit to specified congressional committees, at the beginning of each calendar year, a list of areas recommended by the Director for study for potential inclusion in the National Park System (NPS). Prohibits a study of the potential of an area for inclusion in the NPS from being carried out without specific authorization of an Act of the Congress. Requires the Director to report to specified congressional committees a study of the potential of an area for inclusion in the NPS within three years following the date of enactment of specific legislation providing for such study, including recommendations regarding the preferred management option for the area.
People & committees
Rep. Vento, Bruce F. [D-MN-4] · D–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
For Further Action See H.R.4476.
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 National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E3121-3123)
Referred to the House Committee on Natural 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: Aug 26, 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.3709 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.3709 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.3709 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.3709 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.