PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 103-407.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 2, 1993
Chief Big Foot National Memorial Park and Wounded Knee National Memorial Establishment Act of 1993 - Establishes the Big Foot National Memorial Park in South Dakota to protect the historical significance of the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre site and to protect and promote Sioux history and culture. Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire lands for the Park by: (1) accepting leasehold interests in tribal trust lands located on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation offered by the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, under specified conditions; and (2) purchase, donation, or condemnation of all surface and subsurface rights to any tract of fee patented land which the Director of the National Park Service deems necessary to include in the Park. Directs the Secretary to provide assistance to the Oglala Sioux Tribe in acquiring lands within the Wounded Knee Massacre site as defined in the 1990 boundaries studies authorized by the Service. Directs the Secretary, acting through the Director, to manage such leasehold lands as a unit of the National Park System. Exempts all enrolled members of specified tribes from admission fees into the Park. Requires the Secretary to plan, design, and construct, within the boundaries of the Park, the Wounded Knee National Memorial dedicated to the Indian victims of the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre. Establishes the Chief Big Foot National Memorial Park Advisory Commission. Authorizes the Secretary to enter into cooperative agreements with tribal organizations or nonprofit corporations to raise funds from private sources to supplement Federal funds authorized by this Act and or to raise private funds to plan, design, construct, operate, and maintain specified projects. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Daschle, Thomas A. [D-SD] · D–SD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 103-407.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested executive comment from Department of the Interior, and Office of Management and Budget.
Referred to Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1041-1045)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
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
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.278 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.278 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.278 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.278 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.