PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 15, 2013
Castle Clinton National Monument and Battery Castle Clinton National Monument and Battery Conservancy Partnership Act - Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, through the National Park Service (NPS), to enter into one or more agreements with the Battery Conservancy of New York City, New York, (or a successor not-for-profit organization) to construct and operate the performance facility and associated structures and fixtures proposed for the Castle Clinton National Monument in New York City.
Authorizes the Secretary to retain and use any funds that are received from the Conservancy in accordance with this Act for the operation, enhancement, or interpretation of the Monument.
Allows the Secretary to enter into a cooperative agreement with the Conservancy for interpretive and educational programming related to the Monument.
Provides for the facility to be under U.S. ownership. Prohibits the Conservancy at any time from having any ownership interest, leasehold interest, or other right or interest in such facility.
Requires the facility to be administered by NPS as part of the Monument.
People & committees
Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-10] · D–NY
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 Public Lands and Environmental Regulation.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.788 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.788 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.788 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.788 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.