PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 244 - 174 (Roll no. 537).
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Sep 16, 2010
Casa Grande Ruins National Monument Boundary Modification Act of 2010 - Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire only from willing sellers the private or state lands or interests identified on the map entitled "Proposed Casa Grande Ruins Boundary Modification" and dated January 2010.
Transfers administrative jurisdiction of specified withdrawn federal lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) or the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to the National Park Service (NPS).
Transfers to the BIA the administrative jurisdiction of certain federal land administered by the NPS for purposes of the San Carlos Irrigation Project.
Requires the Secretary to administer all such transferred or acquired lands as part of the Casa Grande Ruins National Monument in Arizona.
Authorizes the Secretary to enter into an agreement with the state of Arizona to provide for cooperative management of specified state trust lands.
Directs the Secretary to conduct a study to identify any additional lands considered appropriate to become part of any further adjustments to the boundary of the Monument.
People & committees
Rep. Kirkpatrick, Ann [D-AZ-1] · D–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 244 - 174 (Roll no. 537).
House roll call 537 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 244 - 174 (Roll no. 537).
House roll call 537 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6903-6904)
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. 5110.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6822-6824; text of measure as reported in House: CR H6822)
Mrs. Christensen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 343.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 111-598.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 111-598.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
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: Apr 7, 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.5110 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.5110 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.5110 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.5110 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.