PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Jan 10, 2013
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Mt. Andrea Lawrence Designation Act of 2011 - Designates peak 12,240, which is located 0.6 miles northeast of Donahue Peak on the northern border of the Ansel Adams Wilderness and Yosemite National Park in California, as Mt. Andrea Lawrence.
People & committees
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-259.
Became Public Law No: 112-259.
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): 408 - 7 (Roll no. 648). (text: CR 12/19/2012 H7319)
House roll call 648 · 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): 408 - 7 (Roll no. 648).(text: CR 12/19/2012 H7319)
House roll call 648 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7414-7415)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Grijalva objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was considered as withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 925.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7319-7320)
Mr. Hastings (WA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 135.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-506.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-506.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S6692)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S6692)
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6692)
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6692)
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 112-214.
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.925 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.925 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.925 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.925 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.