Latest action: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Amends the 1993 Catawba Indian Tribe land settlement agreement in South Carolina.
The problem
The 1993 settlement between the Catawba Indian Tribe and South Carolina may need updates or adjustments to address current circumstances or disputes.
The proposal
Modifies terms of the Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina Land Claims Settlement Act of 1993 to address unspecified issues.
The impact
Affects the Catawba Indian Tribe, South Carolina state government, and potentially surrounding communities regarding land rights and resources.
Amending the settlement could expand the Catawba Tribe's ability to govern their lands and make decisions affecting their community. This supports tribal sovereignty and self-governance rights.
Updates to the 1993 agreement may clarify disputes or issues that have emerged over the past 30+ years. Clearer terms could prevent future conflicts between parties.
Amended land rights could enable new economic development or business opportunities for the tribe. This may create jobs and improve tribal economic conditions.
Updating outdated settlement language provides clear legal standards for all parties involved. Modern language reduces confusion and litigation costs.
Reopening the 1993 settlement creates uncertainty about final outcomes. Negotiations could become contentious, creating conflict between the tribe and state.
Changes to land claims or resource rights may cost South Carolina money or reduce state control over disputed areas. Financial impacts to the state budget are unclear.
New settlement terms may be difficult or expensive to implement and enforce. Practical challenges could delay benefits and create administrative burdens.
Without seeing the actual amendments proposed, it's impossible to assess full impacts. The bill could contain provisions with unintended consequences.
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.
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.