PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 105-344.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 31, 1998
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the supervisor of the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest in Arizona, to develop a plan for the Woodland Lake Park tract designed to ensure management for recreational purposes consistent with the current use of the tract as a public park. Prohibits the Secretary from conveying any U.S. right, title, or interest in and to such tract unless the conveyance is: (1) made to the town of Pinetop-Lakeside; or (2) specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act.
People & committees
Sen. McCain, John [R-AZ] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 105-344.
Became Public Law No: 105-344.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
Mr. Hansen asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and consider.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H10423)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
By Senator Murkowski from Committee on Energy and Natural Resources filed written report. Report No. 105-384.
By Senator Murkowski from Committee on Energy and Natural Resources filed written report. Report No. 105-384.
Passed Senate with amendments and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S12103)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S12103)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 702.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with amendments and an amendment to the title. Without written report.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with amendments and an amendment to the title. Without written report.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Senate Subcommittee on Forests and Public Lands. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 105-864.
Referred to Subcommittee on Forests and Public Lands.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9572)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
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
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.
Analyze S.2413 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.
Examine S.2413 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.
Examine S.2413 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.
Examine S.2413 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.