PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from USDA, Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 30, 2000
Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to: (1) establish a procedure to identify, by State, inholdings within federally designated areas for which the landowner has indicated a desire to sell the land or an interest in land to the Federal Government and to establish the date upon which the land or interest in land identified became an inholding; and (2) provide in the Federal Register and through other means as deemed appropriate periodic notice to the public of such policy, including any information to consider an inholding for acquisition. Provides that an inholding shall be considered for identification only if the Secretary or the Secretary of Agriculture receives notification of a desire to sell from the owner in response to such a notice and shall be deemed to have been established as of the later of the earlier of the date on which the land was withdrawn from the public domain or established or designated for special management, or the date on which the inholding was acquired by the current owner.Directs the Secretary to establish a program, using funds from a Federal Land Disposal Account of the Treasury established by this Act, to complete appraisals and satisfy other legal requirements for the sale or exchange of public land identified for disposal under approved land use plans. Sets forth reporting and program termination requirements. Requires that gross proceeds generated by the sale or exchange of public land under this Act be deposited in the Federal Land Disposal Account. Sets forth provisions regarding use of the Account, contaminated sites and sites difficult and uneconomic to manage, and program termination.
People & committees
Rep. Hefley, Joel [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.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA, Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 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.4135 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.4135 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.4135 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.4135 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.