A bill to provide for a land conveyance to the City of Craig, Alaska, and for other purposes.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 26, 1999
Craig Municipal Equity Act of 1999 - Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to: (1) convey all Federal interests in specified lands to the City of Craig, Alaska; and (2) establish an escrow account to hold proceeds derived after enactment of this Act from contracts, leases, permits, rights-of-way, or easements pertaining to the land to be conveyed and provide for disbursement of those funds, plus interest, to the City when the land is conveyed.Prohibits: (1) timber harvested from land conveyed to the City from being exported as unprocessed logs from Alaska; and (2) the City from selling, trading, substituting, or otherwise conveying that timber to any person for export from Alaska.Provides that the land conveyed under this Act shall be considered in lieu of land not conveyed at statehood for the purpose of furthering development and expansion of the City.
Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2799; text as passed Senate: CR S2799)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S2799; text as passed Senate: CR S2799)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 494.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 106-264.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 106-264.
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. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 106-421.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S13186)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.1797 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.1797 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.1797 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.1797 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.