PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 13, 2002
Good Neighbor Act of 2002 - Prohibits any Federal agency from acquiring any qualified land for a covered agency (the Forest Service, the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) unless the Government disposes of qualified land of such agency located in the same county and having a fair market value equal to at least 97 percent of the land to be acquired. Defines "qualified land" to mean land located in a county in which 50 percent or more of the total acreage is owned by the Government and is under the administrative jurisdiction of one or more covered Federal agencies.Requires the head of a Federal agency before acquiring such qualified land, to: (1) notify the State's Governor, the county chief executive, and each Member of the House of Representatives and the Senate elected to represent the area in which the land is located; and (2) hold at least one hearing in the county.Prohibits an acquisition of qualified land by a Federal agency which will result in 66 percent or more of the total acreage in a county being owned by the Government and under the jurisdiction of one or more covered agencies, unless it is approved by the county.
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.
Executive Comment Received from Interior.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA, Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 19, 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.3962 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.3962 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.3962 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.3962 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.