PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 539.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 13, 2013
Lower Mississippi River Area Study Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to complete a special resource study that evaluates the national significance of a specified study area located in Plaquemines Parish in Louisiana, and the feasibility of designating such area as a unit of the National Park System.
Requires such study to: (1) include cost estimates for the potential acquisition of the study area, and (2) identify alternatives for the management and protection of such area.
Allows the Secretary to accept donated funds to carry out this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Landrieu, Mary L. [D-LA] · D–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 539.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-708.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-708.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S4363)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S4363)
The committee reported amendment was agreed to by Unanimous Consent. (text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S4358-4359)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S4355-4364)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 57.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Wyden with an amendment. With written report No. 113-26.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Wyden with an amendment. With written report No. 113-26.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S712-713)
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.311 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.311 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.311 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.311 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.