PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 103-357.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 2, 1993
Extends: (1) Federal recognition to the Pasqua Yaqui Indians of Arizona (the Tribe); and (2) the enrollment deadline for all U.S. citizens of Yaqui blood who apply for enrollment in the Tribe within three years after enactment of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Pastor, Ed [D-AZ-2] · D–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 103-357.
Became Public Law No: 103-357.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote.
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Mr. Richardson moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S12208-12209)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S12208-12209)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 575.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported to Senate by Senator Inouye with an amendment. With written report No. 103-338.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported to Senate by Senator Inouye with an amendment. With written report No. 103-338.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (consideration: CR H5632-5633)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(consideration: CR H5632-5633)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules.
Mr. Richardson moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-204.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 115.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-204.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Native American Affairs.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E232)
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: Jun 20, 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.734 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.734 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.734 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.734 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.