PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 4, 2025
Reversionary Interest Conveyance Act
This bill directs the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to offer to sell the reversionary interest of the United States in approximately 8.43 acres of land in Sacramento, California, as generally depicted on a specified map dated November 7, 2022. Within two years of receiving a request from the owner of the land, the BLM must offer the reversionary interest and convey the reversionary interest to the buyer upon payment. The payment must be in an amount that is at least the fair market value of the reversionary interest. The buyer must also pay all costs related to the applicable conveyance of the reversionary interest, including all surveys, appraisals, and other administrative costs.
The bill subjects the conveyance to valid existing rights.
The proceeds from the sale must be deposited into Federal Land Disposal Account.
People & committees
Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-7] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 119-135.
Became Public Law No: 119-135.
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 S4882-4883)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S4882-4883)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 491.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Lee without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Lee without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 119-305.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 H1982)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1982)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 952.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1982-1983)
Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
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.
Source last updated: Oct 26, 2026. 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.952 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.952 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.952 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.952 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.