Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2677) to require the Secretary of the Interior to accept from a State donations of services of State employees to perform, in a period of Government budgetary shutdown, otherwise authorized functions in any unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System or the National Park System.

Laid on the table. (consideration: CR H1403)

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 21, 1995

Sets forth the closed rule for the consideration of H.R. 2677 (performance by State employees of Department of the Interior personnel functions in a period of Government budgetary shutdown).

Read the summary on Congress.gov

PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Rep. McInnis, Scott [R-CO-3] · R–CO

Committees

Rules Committee

0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

Feb 28, 1996
Laid on the table. (consideration: CR H1403)
Feb 28, 1996
Mr. Solomon asked unanimous consent that H. Res. 323 be laid on the table. Agreed to without objection.
Dec 21, 1995
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 173.
Dec 21, 1995
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2677 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Providing for the consideration of the bill in the House. A specified amendment is in order. The amendment printed in the report accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted.
Dec 21, 1995
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-442, by Mr. McInnis.
Dec 21, 1995
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 104-442, by Mr. McInnis.
Dec 21, 1995
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Reported in House · Dec 21, 1995 Formatted Text PDF

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

HR 2677 · National Parks and National Wildlife Refuge Systems Freedom Act of 1995

Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.Res.323 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.323, 104th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2677) to require the Secretary of the Interior to accept from a State donations of services of State employees to perform, in a period of Government budgetary shutdown, otherwise authorized functions in any unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System or the National Park System.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-resolution/323

Text version to examine: Reported in House · 1995-12-21.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/104/bills/hres323/BILLS-104hres323rh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:28:48Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze H.Res.323 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.Res.323 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.323, 104th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2677) to require the Secretary of the Interior to accept from a State donations of services of State employees to perform, in a period of Government budgetary shutdown, otherwise authorized functions in any unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System or the National Park System.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-resolution/323

Text version to examine: Reported in House · 1995-12-21.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/104/bills/hres323/BILLS-104hres323rh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:28:48Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.323 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.Res.323 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.323, 104th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2677) to require the Secretary of the Interior to accept from a State donations of services of State employees to perform, in a period of Government budgetary shutdown, otherwise authorized functions in any unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System or the National Park System.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-resolution/323

Text version to examine: Reported in House · 1995-12-21.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/104/bills/hres323/BILLS-104hres323rh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:28:48Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.323 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.Res.323 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.323, 104th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2677) to require the Secretary of the Interior to accept from a State donations of services of State employees to perform, in a period of Government budgetary shutdown, otherwise authorized functions in any unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System or the National Park System.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-resolution/323

Text version to examine: Reported in House · 1995-12-21.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/104/bills/hres323/BILLS-104hres323rh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:28:48Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.323 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.