PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 108-394.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 30, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on September 7, 2004. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Wilson's Creek National Battlefield Boundary Adjustment Act of 2004 - Revises the boundaries of Wilson's Creek National Battlefield to include land and interests therein consisting of six parcels totaling 615 acres and identified as parcels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 on the map entitled "Wilson's Creek National Battlefield Proposed Boundary" and dated January 27, 2004. Specifies the effect of this Act with regard to private property.
States that the boundaries of the Battlefield as revised by this Act represent the area within which Federal funds appropriated for this Act's purposes may be expended. Prohibits the boundary revision from being construed to provide any nonexisting regulatory authority on land use within the Battlefield or its viewshed by the Secretary or the National Park Service.
Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Blunt, Roy [R-MO-7] · R–MO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 108-394.
Became Public Law No: 108-394.
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.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11183-11184)
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11183-11184)
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 H7022 )
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7022 )
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4481.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7022-7023)
Mr. Radanovich moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 395.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-651.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-651.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands Discharged.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation 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.
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.4481 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.4481 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.4481 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.4481 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.