PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Mar 22, 1994
Urban Recreation and At-Risk Youth Act of 1994 - Amends the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Act of 1978 to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide, through the urban park and recreation recovery program, at-risk youth recreation grants in neighborhoods and communities with a high prevalence of crime, particularly violent crime or crime committed by youth, for purposes including the provision of lighting, emergency phones, or other capital improvements for the security of urban parks. Directs the Secretary to give grant priority to local government programs meeting specified criteria, including: (1) targeting youth at the greatest risk of becoming involved in violence and crime; (2) teaching important values and life skills; (3) offering education and counseling in addition to recreation opportunities; and (4) showing the greatest potential of being continued with non-Federal funds or serving as models. Requires local governments, to be eligible for such grants, to include strategies to reduce crime and juvenile delinquency in their five-year action programs for park and recreation recovery. Requires no more than 25 percent of Federal grant funds made available under such Act to be used for program support. Repeals provisions limiting the duration of the urban park and recreation recovery program to five years.
People & committees
Rep. Miller, George [D-CA-7] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks. Hearings held.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested executive comment from Department of the Interior, and Office of Management and Budget.
Referred to Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks.
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 Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 361 - 59 (Roll no. 82).
House roll call 82 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 361 - 59 (Roll no. 82).
House roll call 82 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1839)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed until March 21.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1619-1624)
Mr. Vento moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-444.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 246.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-444.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E433)
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: 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.4034 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.4034 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.4034 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.4034 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.