← Back to Bills
HR 4377118th CongressFailed / ExpiredHouse

To amend the Military Lands Withdrawal Act of 1999 with respect to extensions, additions, and revisions to the Barry M. Goldwater Range in Arizona.

Policy Area: Public Lands and Natural Resources
View on Congress.gov
Origin Chamber
House
Last Updated
Jun 6, 2025
Latest Action Date
Dec 19, 2024

Latest Action

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 772.

Official Summary

Official summary has not been imported yet.

GovScope Watchdog™

AI Government Intelligence™
Executive Summary

H.R. 4377 proposes amendments to the Military Lands Withdrawal Act of 1999 specifically concerning the Barry M. Goldwater Range in Arizona. The bill addresses extensions, additions, and revisions to the military land withdrawal boundaries for this range, which is used for military training and operations. The legislative action aims to modify the legal framework governing the use and management of these lands to accommodate changes in military needs or land management policies.

Bottom Line

This bill seeks to update the legal boundaries and management provisions of the Barry M. Goldwater Range in Arizona to reflect current military and land use requirements but did not advance past placement on the Union Calendar.

Policy Risk Level
🟡 Medium
Neutral Risk Assessment
Key Points
  • Amends the Military Lands Withdrawal Act of 1999 with respect to the Barry M. Goldwater Range in Arizona.
  • Focuses on extensions, additions, and revisions to the range's land withdrawal boundaries.
  • Placed on the Union Calendar but ultimately failed or expired without further legislative action.
Who Benefits?

['U.S. Department of Defense and military personnel utilizing the Barry M. Goldwater Range for training and operations', 'Federal land management agencies involved in overseeing the range', 'Local and state governments in Arizona potentially affected by land use changes']

Potential Concerns

['Implementation challenges related to coordinating land management between military and civilian agencies', 'Potential costs associated with land acquisition, management, or environmental compliance', 'Oversight complexities due to changes in land withdrawal boundaries and jurisdiction', 'Policy tradeoffs between military training needs and public land conservation or local community interests']

Political Context

The bill was introduced in the House during the 118th Congress and placed on the Union Calendar, indicating it was scheduled for consideration but did not progress to a vote or enactment. It falls within the policy area of Public Lands and Natural Resources, reflecting ongoing legislative efforts to balance military land use with federal land management statutes.

Hidden Impact Review

Hidden impact flags detected: 2

GovScope reviewed 2 policy-risk categories. Hover for a quick definition. Click detected flags for bill-specific details.

2 Detected
Detected Flags
Indirect Effects

['Possible shifts in local economic activity due to changes in land use and military operations', 'Altered environmental management practices in the affected areas', 'Potential changes in federal-state relations regarding land management oversight']

GovScope Watchdog Notes

The bill lacks a publicly available official summary and full text, limiting detailed analysis. Its placement on the Union Calendar without further action suggests limited legislative momentum. Transparency about the specific land changes and their implications for environmental and local stakeholders would be important for oversight. Monitoring coordination between military and land management agencies is essential to ensure compliance with environmental and public land policies.

Passage Likelihood: LowConfidence: 85%Model: gpt-4.1-mini

GovScope Intelligence Roadmap

Future bill intelligence will connect sponsors, committee referrals, related votes, campaign finance, disclosures, and stock trades into one legislative intelligence view.

Enterprise Ready