PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.4697 / 103rd Congress

Walnut Canyon National Monument Boundary Modification Act of 1994

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 445.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 30, 1994

Walnut Canyon National Monument Boundary Modification Act of 1994 - Modifies the boundaries of the Walnut Canyon National Monument in Arizona. Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire lands and interests in lands within the Monument. Transfers Federal property: (1) within the boundaries of the Monument (as modified by this Act) to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior for management as part of the Monument; and (2) excluded from the Monument (pursuant to the boundary modification) to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture to be managed as part of the Coconino National Forest. Requires the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service, to manage the Monument as a unit of the National Park Service. Authorizes appropriations.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. English, Karan [D-AZ-6] · D–AZ

Committees

  • Natural Resources Committee
5 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 445.

  2. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-799.

  3. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-799.

  4. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.

  5. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  6. Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Discharged.

  7. Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.

  8. Hearings Held by the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Prior to Referral.

  9. Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

  10. Introduced in House

  11. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Feb 7, 2024. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.4697 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.4697 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.4697 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.4697 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.

View full prompt & sources