PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 63.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · May 9, 2017
Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park Boundary Revision Act
(Sec. 3) This bill redesignates the Ocmulgee National Monument in Georgia as the Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park. The boundary of the park is adjusted to include approximately 2,100 acres.
The Department of the Interior may acquire lands and interests within the boundaries of the park by donation, purchase from a willing seller, or exchange, but not by condemnation.
Interior shall administer any acquired land as part of the park.
(Sec. 4) Interior shall conduct a special resource study of the Ocmulgee River corridor between the cities of Macon and Hawkinsville, Georgia, to :
evaluate the national significance of the study area;
determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the study area as a unit of the National Park System; and
consider other alternatives for the preservation, protection, and interpretation of the study area by the federal government, state or local government entities, or private and nonprofit organizations.
People & committees
Rep. Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [D-GA-2] · D–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 63.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 115-50.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 115-50.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 396 - 8 (Roll no. 67). (text: CR H714)
House roll call 67 · 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): 396 - 8 (Roll no. 67).(text: CR H714)
House roll call 67 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H720-721)
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. 538.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H714-716)
Mr. McClintock moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
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.
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.538 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.538 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.538 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.538 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.