PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Returned to the Calendar. Calendar No. 449. (consideration: CR S7981)
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Jun 20, 1996
National Gambling Impact Study Commission Act - Establishes the National Gambling Impact Study Commission to conduct a comprehensive legal and factual study of the social and economic impacts of gambling in the United States on: (1) Federal, State, local, and Native American tribal governments; and (2) communities and social institutions generally, including individuals, families, and businesses within such communities and institutions. Mandates a report to the President, the Congress, State Governors, and Native American tribal governments. Requires the Commission to contract with the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations and the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences for assistance with the study. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Simon, Paul [D-IL] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Returned to the Calendar. Calendar No. 449. (consideration: CR S7981)
Senate passed companion measure H.R. 497 in lieu of this measure by Unanimous Consent.
Senate incorporated this measure in H.R. 497 as an amendment. (consideration: CR S7981)
The committee substitute as amended agreed to by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate. (consideration: CR S7971-7981)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 449.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Reported to Senate by Senator Stevens with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Reported to Senate by Senator Stevens with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6544)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5915-5916)
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Committee consideration and Mark Up Session held.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 104-592.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10912-10916)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5851-5852)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5447-5448)
Introduced in Senate
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3759-3760)
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 14, 2025. 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.704 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.704 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.704 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.704 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.