A bill to provide for disposal of certain public lands in support of the Manzanar National Historic Site in the State of California, and for other purposes.
Referred to Subcommittee on Parks, Preservation and Recreation.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 4, 1996
Terminates the withdrawal of specified lands (lands identified for disposal in the Bureau of Land Management's Bishop Resource Area Resource Management Plan that could be made available for exchange in support of acquiring lands within the boundary of the Manzanar National Historic Site in California) from operation of public land laws. Opens the lands for operation under the public land laws, including the mining and mineral leasing laws, after the Secretary of the Interior has published notice thereof in the Federal Register. Modifies the boundaries of the Site to include an additional area as demarcated in the Manzanar National Historic Site Archaeological Base Map, dated March 8, 1996.
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.2052 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.2052 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.2052 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.2052 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.