PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 21, 2010
Meers Point Boundary Adjustment Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, after completing a survey of Meers Point which covers those portions of lots 34, 35, 37, and 38 that are currently within the Imperial National Wildlife Refuge in Yuma County, Arizona, to convey to the current landowner or landowners of certain properties within such lots (grantees) by quitclaim deed that federal land that is within each grantee's lot.
Requires each grantee to pay a percentage of the total administrative costs incurred by the United States. Waives such payment respecting any conveyance of federal land to the state of Arizona.
Requires any proceeds paid to the Secretary to remain available for visitor services and resource protection at the Imperial National Wildlife Refuge.
People & committees
Rep. Grijalva, Raúl M. [D-AZ-7] · D–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife.
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: Aug 14, 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.5100 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.5100 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.5100 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.5100 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.