PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 22, 2010
Authorizes the Peace Corps Commemorative Foundation to establish a commemorative work on federal land in the District of Columbia to commemorate the formation of the Peace Corps and to honor the ideals upon which it was founded.
Prohibits the use of federal funds to pay any expense to establish the commemorative work.
Gives the Peace Corps Commemorative Foundation sole responsibility for the acceptance of contributions for, and payment of the expenses of, the establishment of the commemorative work.
Requires the Peace Corps Commemorative Foundation to transmit any remaining balance of funds received for the establishment of the commemorative work to the Secretary of the Interior for deposit in a separate account with the National Park Foundation.
Requires the budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, to be determined by reference to the latest statement titled "Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation," provided that such statement has been submitted for printing in the Congressional Record prior to the vote on passage.
People & committees
Rep. Farr, Sam [D-CA-17] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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 amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6826)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6826)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4195.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6826-6828)
Mrs. Christensen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 347.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 111-602.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 111-602.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
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.
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.4195 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.4195 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.4195 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.4195 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.