PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 109-93.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Mar 8, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Rocky Mountain National Park Boundary Adjustment Act of 2005 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to accept an offer to convey specified federal land near MacGregor Ranch, Larimer County, Colorado, in exchange for specified non-federal land located near the Ranch.
Instructs the Secretary to: (1) reserve an easement to the federal land for the purposes of protecting, preserving, and enhancing the conservation values of that land; and (2) adjust the boundary of Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, to reflect the acquisition of the non-federal land and manage such land as part of the Park.
People & committees
Sen. Allard, Wayne [R-CO] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 109-93.
Became Public Law No: 109-93.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H8869-8870)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H8869-8870)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 55.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8869-8870)
Mrs. Musgrave moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9018-9052; text as passed Senate: CR S9026-9027)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9018-9052; text as passed Senate: CR S9026-9027)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 30.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici without amendment. With written report No. 109-19.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici without amendment. With written report No. 109-19.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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.55 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.55 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.55 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.55 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.