PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-133.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Aug 2, 1999
Arizona Statehood and Enabling Act Amendments of 1999 - Requires: (1) the permanent trust funds of Arizona, including all interest, dividends, other income, and appreciation in the market value of assets of the funds, to be prudently invested on a total rate of return basis; and (2) distributions from such funds to be made as provided in Arizona's Constitution.Allows amounts in the Miners' Hospital Endowment Fund to be used for the Arizona Pioneers' Home and makes such amendment effective as of June 20, 1910.Declares that Congress consents to the amendments to the Constitution of the State of Arizona approved by the voters of Arizona on November 3, 1998.
People & committees
Rep. Stump, Bob [R-AZ-3] · R–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: 106-133.
Became Public Law No: 106-133.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S15158)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S15158)
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 250.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 357). (text: CR H6774)
House roll call 357 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 357).(text: CR H6774)
House roll call 357 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6809)
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. 747.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6773-6775)
Mr. Saxton moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 79.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-140.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-140.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public 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: Apr 7, 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.747 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.747 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.747 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.747 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.