PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Resource Conservation, Research and Forestry.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 4, 1995
Conservation Reserve Program Reform Act of 1995 - Amends the Food Security Act of 1985 to extend: (1) the Environmental Conservation Acreage Reserve Program; and (2) the wetlands reserve program. Authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to extend or modify conservation reserve contracts under specified circumstances. Authorizes a demonstration grant program to permit grass or legumes to be grown on reserve land. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Bereuter, Doug [R-NE-1] · R–NE
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 Resource Conservation, Research and Forestry.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
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 21, 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.67 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.67 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.67 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.67 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.