Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2936) to expedite under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and improve forest management activities on National Forest System lands, on public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, and on Tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown, fire-prone forested lands, and for other purposes.

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 31, 2017

Sets forth the rule for consideration of H.R. 2936 (the Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2017).

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. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4] · R–WA

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.

Nov 1, 2017
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Nov 1, 2017
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 232 - 184 (Roll no. 593). (text: CR H8309)
House roll call 593 · Individual votes
Nov 1, 2017
Passed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 232 - 184 (Roll no. 593).(text: CR H8309)
House roll call 593 · Individual votes
Nov 1, 2017
On ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 232 - 184 (Roll no. 592). (consideration: CR H8316-8317)
House roll call 592 · Individual votes
Nov 1, 2017
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 595.
Nov 1, 2017
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H8309-8318)
Oct 31, 2017
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 95.
Oct 31, 2017
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2936 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Oct 31, 2017
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 115-378, by Mr. Newhouse.
Oct 31, 2017
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 115-378, by Mr. Newhouse.
Oct 31, 2017
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

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

Engrossed in House · Nov 1, 2017 Formatted Text PDF Formatted XML
Reported in House · Oct 31, 2017 Formatted Text PDF Formatted XML

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

HR 2936 · Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2017

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.595 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.595, 115th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2936) to expedite under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and improve forest management activities on National Forest System lands, on public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, and on Tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown, fire-prone forested lands, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-resolution/595

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2017-11-01.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hres595/BILLS-115hres595eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:21:59Z. 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.595 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.595 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.595, 115th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2936) to expedite under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and improve forest management activities on National Forest System lands, on public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, and on Tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown, fire-prone forested lands, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-resolution/595

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2017-11-01.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hres595/BILLS-115hres595eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:21:59Z. 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.595 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.595 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.595, 115th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2936) to expedite under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and improve forest management activities on National Forest System lands, on public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, and on Tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown, fire-prone forested lands, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-resolution/595

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2017-11-01.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hres595/BILLS-115hres595eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:21:59Z. 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.595 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.595 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.595, 115th Congress: Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2936) to expedite under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and improve forest management activities on National Forest System lands, on public lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, and on Tribal lands to return resilience to overgrown, fire-prone forested lands, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-resolution/595

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2017-11-01.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hres595/BILLS-115hres595eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:21:59Z. 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.595 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.