PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 109-47.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Jul 26, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Colorado River Indian Reservation Boundary Correction Act - Declares that the boundaries of the Colorado River Indian Reservation are the boundaries delineated by the Robbins Survey of 1875 and affirmed by the Harrington Resurvey of 1912 (which include 16,000 acres known as the La Paz lands).
Restores to the Reservation all right, title, and interest of the United States to those lands within such boundaries that were excluded from the Reservation pursuant to Executive Order No. 2273 (November 22, 1915), which shall be held in trust by the United States on behalf of the Colorado River Indian Tribes. (Excludes from such restored lands specified Arizona State Lands.)
Declares that land taken into trust under this Act shall neither be considered to have been taken into trust for gaming nor be used for gaming.
People & committees
Rep. Grijalva, Raúl M. [D-AZ-7] · 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: 109-47.
Became Public Law No: 109-47.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9055-9056)
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9055-9056)
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. (text: CR H1865-1866)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H1865-1866)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 794.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1865-1867)
Mr. Duncan moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
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.
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.794 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.794 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.794 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.794 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.