PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 105-74.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 16, 1997
Requires the Secretary of the Interior to convey specified selected lands in Hinsdale County, Colorado, to Lake City Ranches, Ltd. (LCR) (a Texas limited partnership) in exchange for acceptable offered lands which lie within, or in proximity to, the Handies Peak or Red Cloud Peak Wilderness Study Areas or the Alpine Loop Backcountry Bi-way in such county. Provides that such exchange shall be: (1) contingent upon LCR granting the Secretary of the Interior a permanent conservation easement to a specified portion of the lands conveyed to it; and (2) subject to the appraisal requirements and equalization payment limitations set forth in provisions of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and to reviews and approvals relating to threatened and endangered species, cultural and historical resources, and hazardous materials under other Federal laws.
People & committees
Sen. Campbell, Ben Nighthorse [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: 105-74.
Became Public Law No: 105-74.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 406 - 0 (Roll no. 572).
House roll call 572 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 406 - 0 (Roll no. 572).
House roll call 572 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business.
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Faleomavaega objected to the Yea - Nay vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9927, H9984)
Mr. Hansen 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 with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S10779)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S10779)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 191.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 105-96.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 105-96.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested executive comment from Department of the Interior and Office of Management and Budget.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably. Amendment incorporates provisions of H.R.951.
Subcommittee on Forests and Public Lands. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 105-158.
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 S3269-3270)
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.587 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.587 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.587 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.587 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.