PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.By Senator Murkowski from Committee on Energy and Natural Resources filed written report. Report No. 104-374.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Mar 14, 1995
Amends the National Trails System Act to designate the Great Western Scenic Trail, a system of trails to accommodate a variety of travel users in a corridor extending from the Arizona-Mexico border to the Idaho-Montana-Canada border, for study for addition to the national scenic trails system. Requires the trail study to be conducted by the Secretary of Agriculture and to include: (1) the current status of land ownership and current and potential use along the designated route; (2) the estimated cost of acquisition of lands or interests in lands; and (3) an examination of the appropriateness of motorized trail use along the trail.
People & committees
Rep. Hansen, James V. [R-UT-1] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
By Senator Murkowski from Committee on Energy and Natural Resources filed written report. Report No. 104-374.
By Senator Murkowski from Committee on Energy and Natural Resources filed written report. Report No. 104-374.
Star Print ordered on the bill as reported.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 612.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Subcommittee on Parks, Preservation and Recreation. Hearings held.
Referred to Subcommittee on Parks, Preservation and Recreation.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 400 - 15 (Roll No. 230).
House roll call 230 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 400 - 15 (Roll No. 230).
House roll call 230 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business.
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3100-3101, H3115)
Mr. Hansen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 27.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-54.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-54.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.531 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.531 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.531 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.531 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.