PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 25, 2003
Western Shoshone Claims Distribution Act - Provides for the distribution of specified funds appropriated in satisfaction of a judgment award granted to the Western Shoshone Indians in Docket Number 326-K before the Indian Claims Commission to U.S. citizens who have at least 1/4 Western Shoshone blood and who are enrolled on a Western Shoshone Judgment Roll to be established by the Secretary of the Interior.Requires that such funds and specified funds appropriated in satisfaction of the judgment awards granted to such Indians in Docket Numbers 326-A-1 and 326-A-3 before the U.S. Court of Claims be credited to and distributed from a Western Shoshone Educational Trust Fund to be established by the Secretary: (1) for educational grants and other forms of educational assistance to individual Western Shoshone members; and (2) to pay reasonable and necessary expenses of an Administrative Committee established by this Act to oversee the distribution of such educational grants and assistance.
People & committees
Rep. Gibbons, Jim [R-NV-2] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 108-270.
Became Public Law No: 108-270.
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 6/25/2004 S7495-7496)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR 6/25/2004 S7495-7496)
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 592.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4610-4611)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H4610-4611)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 884.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4610-4612)
Mr. Gibbons moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 174.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-299.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-299.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 21 - 14.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
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.884 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.884 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.884 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.884 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.