PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources received executive comment from Department of the Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 23, 1995
Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Amendments Act of 1995 - Modifies the boundaries of the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor. Requires the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission to revise the Cultural Heritage and Land Management Plan to address the boundary change and include a natural resource inventory of areas or features that should be protected, restored, managed, or acquired because of their contribution to the understanding of national cultural landscape values. Prohibits changes other than minor revisions in the approved plan as amended without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior. Extends the date of termination of the Commission until ten years after this Act's enactment, subject to specified conditions. Directs the Secretary to approve an additional extension if the Secretary finds that: (1) the Governors of Massachusetts and Rhode Island provide adequate assurances of continued tangible contribution and effective policy support toward achieving the purposes of the Corridor; and (2) the Commission is effectively assisting Federal, State, and local authorities to retain, enhance, and interpret the distinctive character and nationally significant resources of the Corridor. Authorizes the Secretary to undertake a limited program of financial assistance for the purpose of providing funds for the preservation and restoration of structures on or eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places within the Corridor which exhibit national significance or provide a wide spectrum of historic, recreational, or environmental education opportunities to the general public. Specifies that nothing in the Act establishing the Corridor shall be construed to affect or authorize the Commission to interfere with: (1) the rights of any person with respect to private property; or (2) any local zoning ordinance or land use plan of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or a political subdivision of such Commonwealth. Increases and extends the authorization of appropriations under the Act.
People & committees
Sen. Chafee, John H. [R-RI] · R–RI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources received executive comment from Department of the Interior.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 65.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 104-42.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 104-42.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Referred to Subcommittee on Parks, Preservation and Recreation.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4493-4494)
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.601 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.601 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.601 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.601 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.