PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 59.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · May 9, 2017
Medgar Evers House Study Act
(Sec. 3) This bill directs the Department of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of the home of the late civil rights activist Medgar Evers, which is located at 2332 Margaret Walker Alexander Drive in Jackson, Mississippi.
Interior shall: (1) evaluate the national significance of the study area; (2) determine the suitability and feasibility of designating it as a unit of the National Park System; and (3) consider alternatives for preservation, protection, and interpretation of the study area by the federal government, state or local governments, or private and nonprofit organizations.
People & committees
Sen. Cochran, Thad [R-MS] · R–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 59.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 115-46.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 115-46.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute 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.644 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.644 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.644 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.644 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.