Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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
Authorizes water resource projects for the Dry-Redwater region.
The problem
The Dry-Redwater region needs updated federal water management authorization. Local water supply and infrastructure require new congressional approval.
The proposal
Creates federal authorization for regional water resource development projects. Allows construction and management of water infrastructure in the Dry-Redwater area.
The impact
Affects farmers, communities, and governments in the Dry-Redwater region. Impacts water availability, land use, and local economies.
Authorizes infrastructure that could increase reliable water supply to farms and communities. Better water management helps agricultural productivity and household water security.
Water projects can support agriculture, industry, and population growth in the region. Creates jobs in construction and ongoing water management operations.
Congressional authorization enables federal funding and technical support for projects. Brings resources the region may not have alone.
Allows the region to develop water resources suited to its specific needs. Communities can plan based on their own priorities.
Water projects can impact rivers, wetlands, and wildlife habitats. May affect fish populations and natural ecosystems in the region.
Water infrastructure projects are expensive to build and maintain. May require ongoing federal funding or burden local taxpayers.
No official summary available, so full scope of projects is unknown. Hard to evaluate impacts without knowing specific proposals.
Projects may create disputes between different water users or states. Could pit farmers against environmental protection efforts.
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.