(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Pascua Yaqui Tribe Trust Land Act - Holds in trust for the Pascua Yaqui Tribe of Arizona all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to approximately 10 acres of federal land generally depicted as parcel A, and approximately 10 acres of federal land generally depicted as parcel B, on the map titled "PYT Land Department," dated January 15, 2013.
Makes that conveyance effective on the day after the date on which: (1) the Tucson Unified School District relinquishes all right, title, and interest to the parcel B land; and (2) the Secretary of the Interior approves and records the lease agreement between the Tribe and the District for the construction and operation of a regional transportation facility located on the Tribe's restricted land. Prohibits gaming on the lands held in trust under this Act.
Prohibits the forfeiture or abandonment of any water rights that are appurtenant to such lands.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 401 - 2 (Roll no. 131).(text: CR H2411)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2413-2414)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 507.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2411-2412)
Mr. Young (AK) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 15.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-27.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-27.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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
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.507 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.507 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.507 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.507 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.