PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 112-250.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Jan 10, 2013
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on July 17, 2012. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to accept the quitclaim, disclaimer, and relinquishment by the Manitou and Pikes Peak Railway Company of a specified right-of-way adjacent to Pike National Forest that was originally granted to the Mt. Manitou Park and Incline Railway Company for the construction of a railroad and station in El Paso County, Colorado.
People & committees
Rep. Lamborn, Doug [R-CO-5] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-250.
Became Public Law No: 112-250.
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. (consideration: CR S8552-8556)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S8552-8556)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
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 7/31/2012 H5432)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 7/31/2012 H5432)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5599)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Sablan objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4073.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5432-5433)
Mr. Lamborn moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 434.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-599.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-599.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended).
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
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: Apr 7, 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.4073 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.4073 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.4073 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.4073 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.