Columbia-Pacific National Heritage Area Study Act

Key: what the circles and colors mean

Each circle is a bill. The ring fills as it moves through Congress:

IntroducedPassed one chamberPassed both chambersBecame law (gold)Resolution agreed to (full, dark)Failed or vetoed (gray)

Under the number: the Yea · Nay count of its final (or latest) recorded vote. On a member's page, the small badge is how that member voted: Y Yea / Aye, N Nay / No, P Present, – Not voting.

Gold and violet are only for Yea and Nay; they never mean a party. A member's party is the letter on their photo.

Never voted on. It didn't reach a floor vote before the 109th Congress ended, so it expired. A bill has to be introduced again to be considered in a new Congress.

D BairdSponsor

2 cosponsors · 2 D

D Wu DM

D Matsui

1 signed on when it was introduced; the rest joined later. Cosponsors who withdrew aren't shown.

What it does: CRS summary · Introduced in House · May 25, 2006

Columbia-Pacific National Heritage Area Study Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study to determine the feasibility of designating the coastal areas of Clatsop County, Oregon, and Pacific County, Washington (also known as the North Beach Peninsula) and areas relating to Native American history, local history, Euro-American settlement culture, and related economic activities of the Columbia River within a corridor along such River eastward in Clatsop County and Pacific, Columbia, and Wahkiakum Counties, Washington, as the "Columbia-Pacific National Heritage Area."

Written by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. All summary versions on Congress.gov

About this bill and sources

Official title: Columbia-Pacific National Heritage Area Study Act

Latest action (Sep 7, 2006): Subcommittee Hearings Held.

Policy area: Public Lands and Natural Resources · Origin: House · Introduced: May 25, 2006

Official page on Congress.gov · Bill text (GovInfo) · Status record (XML)

No recorded floor vote found.