Latest action: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 649.
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
Authorizes a study to explore expanding the Lewis and Clark Regional Water System.
The problem
The Lewis and Clark Regional Water System may need expansion to serve growing water demands in the region, but feasibility is unclear.
The proposal
The bill directs a feasibility study to examine options for expanding the Lewis and Clark Regional Water System's capacity and service area.
The impact
Regional water users, communities, and municipalities in the Lewis and Clark service area will benefit from information about future water availability and expansion possibilities.
A feasibility study provides critical information about whether expansion is viable, helping communities make smart decisions about water resources. This prevents wasted money on projects that won't work.
Understanding water system expansion options helps communities plan for population growth and economic development. Reliable water supply is essential for attracting businesses and residents.
The bill only funds a study, not actual construction. This allows investigation of options before committing to expensive projects.
Studying expansion options helps ensure communities have adequate, reliable water supplies for drinking, agriculture, and industry.
The feasibility study requires federal funding that comes from taxpayers. The study's findings might not lead to any actual project.
Water system expansion could impact rivers, wetlands, and ecosystems. The study may reveal environmental tradeoffs that communities must accept.
A study does not guarantee that expansion will happen or be affordable. Results might show expansion is too expensive or not practical.
Time spent studying could delay other water management solutions already available, like conservation or infrastructure repairs.
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.