A bill to provide for the exchange of certain federally owned lands and mineral interests therein, and for other purposes.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 403.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · May 13, 1996
Provides for an exchange of specified lands, mineral interests, and oil and gas interests in Arkansas and Oklahoma between the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture and the Weyerhaeuser Company. Provides for a reservation of specified oil and gas interests by Weyerhaeuser. Withdraws Federal lands to be conveyed from entry and appropriation under the public lands, mining, mineral leasing, and geothermal steam leasing laws. Subjects specified lands conveyed to the United States under this Act to the Weeks Law and provides for their administration as National Forest System lands. Requires other specified lands conveyed to the United States to be managed as a component of the Cossatot National Wildlife Refuge and directs the Secretary of the Interior to implement a single refuge management plan for such expanded Refuge. Modifies the boundaries of the Ouachita National Forest to encompass certain acquired lands.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 403.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 104-268.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 104-268.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested executive comment from Department of Agriculture, and Office of Management and Budget.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Referred to Subcommittee on Forests and Public Lands.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9805-9807)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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 S.1025 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
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1025 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
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1025 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
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1025 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.