Latest action: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 587.
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
Bill to improve how federal agencies manage and report on water resource projects.
The problem
Federal water projects often lack clear goals and accountability. Agencies don't consistently measure or share results with the public about project success or spending.
The proposal
Requires federal agencies to set specific goals for water projects, measure results, report findings publicly, and coordinate better across departments on watershed management.
The impact
Water agencies, states, local governments, and communities relying on water projects will see more transparent reporting and potentially better-coordinated water management efforts.
Agencies must set clear goals and measure if projects work. This helps taxpayers understand if money is spent wisely on water infrastructure.
Federal agencies working on water issues will share information better. This reduces duplicate work and helps solve water problems more effectively across regions.
Results and data become public, so communities and states can see how water projects perform. This helps inform local decision-making about water resources.
Setting measurable goals helps agencies plan water projects based on real evidence of what works. This leads to smarter resource management.
New reporting and measurement requirements cost money. Federal agencies may need more staff and resources to track and report results.
More reporting requirements could slow down project decisions. Agencies might spend more time on paperwork than on actual water management work.
The bill doesn't clearly explain what happens if agencies fail to meet goals or report properly. This could make the requirements ineffective.
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.