Latest action: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 638.
Committee has approved the bill (usually with amendments) and sent it back to the full chamber.
The committee voted to send the bill to the floor of the full chamber. The Senate Majority Leader schedules a floor vote.
Next: Passed One Chamber
The other chamber (Senate or House) repeats the committee + floor-vote process
Clarifies rules for moving water into underground aquifers for storage and recharge purposes.
The problem
The Aquifer Recharge Flexibility Act has unclear language about how water can be conveyed to underground aquifers. This confusion may limit water storage and management options in areas facing water shortages.
The proposal
The bill amends the act to clarify what counts as a valid conveyance for aquifer recharge. This removes ambiguity about allowable water transfer methods and purposes.
The impact
Water managers, farmers, and communities gain clearer rules for storing water underground. States with drought concerns benefit from more flexible water management options.
Removing confusion helps water managers use aquifer recharge more effectively. States can plan better for droughts and water emergencies. Clear rules reduce legal disputes.
Communities facing water shortages can store excess water for future use. This improves long-term water security without building new dams. Underground storage is cheaper than surface reservoirs.
Farmers benefit from reliable water access through improved aquifer management. Clarified rules help agricultural regions plan irrigation more effectively.
Clear conveyance rules mean fewer legal battles between states and water users. Transparent guidelines make water agreements easier to negotiate.
Increased aquifer recharge could affect groundwater quality or deplete some aquifers faster. The bill doesn't address environmental safeguards or monitoring requirements.
Clarified rules could give water-rich states advantages in transferring water. Downstream users might lose water they depend on.
Without an official summary, specifics remain unclear about what changes. Implementation details and costs are unknown.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
HR 7250
To reauthorize the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System Act of 2000.
HR 10602
Ottawa County Environmental Infrastructure Act
HR 10533
Newton County Water Infrastructure Improvement Act
S 2753
Urban Canal Modernization Act
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.