PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Held at the desk.
Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Jul 12, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the Senate on June 21, 2010. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Authorizes appropriations for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission for FY2010-FY2014.
Amends the Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000 with respect to the Federal National and Regional Records Center Revolving Fund.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Increases from 4% to 10% the maximum amount of the Fund's total income that may be retained as an operating reserve or for the replacement or acquisition of capital equipment and other support systems of the National Archives and Records Administration.
Increases from 4% to 10% the threshold amount in excess of which any amounts remaining in the Fund at the close of each fiscal year that must be returned to the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.
Amends the Presidential Historical Records Preservation Act of 2008 to shift from the Commission to the Archivist the authority to make grants for establishment of state and local databases for records of servitude, emancipation, and post-civil war reconstruction. Requires the Archivist to consider Commission advice and recommendations before making such a grant.
People & committees
Sen. Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE] · D–DE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5750; text as passed Senate: CR S5750)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S5750; text as passed Senate: CR S5750)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 438.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with amendments. With written report No. 111-213.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with amendments. With written report No. 111-213.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S13035)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S13034-13035)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. 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.2872 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.2872 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.2872 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.2872 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.