PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Sep 27, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
States that the ratification and approval of the Jicarilla Apache Nation's deed for specified settlement lands and the issuance of a patent pursuant to this Act shall not take effect until the Secretary of the Interior finds the following events have occurred: (1) the Board of Commissioners of the Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, has enacted a resolution permanently abandoning a specified disputed county road and has submitted a copy of that resolution to the Secretary; and (2) the Jicarilla Apache Nation has executed a quitclaim deed to Rio Arriba County for specified settlement lands subject to the exceptions identified in the Settlement Agreement and has submitted a copy of such deed to the Secretary. Requires the Secretary to publish such findings in the Federal Register.
Ratifies and approves the Jicarilla Apache Nation's quitclaim deed for the settlement lands to the County, but such ratification and approval shall be effective only upon satisfaction of all conditions specified above and only as of the date that the Secretary's findings are published in the Federal Register.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary to issue to the County a patent for the settlement lands. Subjects the patent to all valid existing rights of third parties, including but not limited to easements of record. Requires that the patent include a specified perpetual restrictive covenant running with the Settlement Lands for the benefit of the lands comprising the Jicarilla Apache Reservation adjacent to the Settlement Lands.
Provides that the lands conveyed to the County in such patent shall cease to be a part of the Jicarilla Apache Reservation and the exterior boundary of the Reservation shall be deemed relocated accordingly.
People & committees
Rep. Udall, Tom [D-NM-3] · D–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7662)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7662)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4876.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7662-7663)
Mr. Gohmert moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E269)
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: Jun 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.4876 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.4876 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.4876 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.4876 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.