PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 103-454.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 12, 1994
Prohibits the withdrawal of recognition or acknowledgement of an Indian tribe or Alaska Native Group, except by an Act of Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Thomas, Craig [R-WY-At Large] · R–WY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 103-454.
Became Public Law No: 103-454.
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 Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S15029)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S15029)
Senate vitiated previous actions on SP 2648, SP 2647 and SP 2646 by Unanimous Consent.
Senate vitiated previous passage. By unanimous consent and vitiated the amendment to the title.
Passed Senate with amendments and an amendment to the Title by Voice Vote.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments and an amendment to the Title by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 2648 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 2648 proposed by Senator Breaux for Senator Inouye.
Amendment SP 2647 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 2647 proposed by Senator Breaux for Senator Akaka.
Amendment SP 2646 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 2646 proposed by Senator Breaux for Senator Stevens.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S14676-14677)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
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.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10488-10490)
Mr. Richardson moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 428.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-781.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-781.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Native American Affairs.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E628-629)
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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.4180 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.4180 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.4180 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.4180 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.