PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 2, 2012
Amends the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990, for the purposes of a civil action brought against a person for the misrepresentation of an Indian produced good or an Indian product to revise the definition of "Indian" to include: (1) a member of an Indian organization who resides in the state in which the Indian organization is chartered and headquartered and is a direct lineal descendant of a person listed on the base roll of an Indian tribe, whether or not such individual qualifies for membership in the Indian tribe; or (2) is a member of an Indian organization and who resides in the state in which the Indian organization is chartered and headquartered and is a direct lineal descendant of a person listed on a judgment fund distribution list, roll, or census of Indians or other document prepared and approved by the Secretary of the Interior whether or not such list, roll, or census or document is used by an Indian tribe to determine membership.
Defines "Indian organization" to mean: (1) a nonprofit organization that is chartered as a charitable organization with the state in which the organization is headquartered; (2) is recognized by a state legislative body as an Indian organization or group, in which a majority of its members are recognized as Indians, whether or not such organization is recognized as a state or federally recognized tribe; (3) is dedicated to preserving Native American principles, traditions, culture, history, language, and arts; (4) performs free genealogical information on its members to verify that an individual meets the definition of "Indian" as defined in this Act; and (5) retains genealogical information collected on its members for verification.
People & committees
Rep. Rahall, Nick J., II [D-WV-3] · D–WV
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 Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the Subcommittee Indian and Alaska Native Affairs.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.6274 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.6274 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.6274 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.6274 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.