To direct the Secretary of the Army to deposit $1,400,000 into the Judgment Fund of the Department of Justice to cover those costs of the project for flood control, Lost Creek, Columbus, Nebraska, which are in excess of the $4,000,000 limit on projects carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948.

Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 28, 1995

Directs the Secretary of the Army to deposit $1.4 million into the Judgment Fund of the Department of Justice to cover excess costs of the Lost Creek flood control project, Columbus, Nebraska, as authorized under the Flood Control Act of 1948. Authorizes appropriations in the same amount for FY 1995.

Read the summary on Congress.gov

PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Rep. Barrett, Bill [R-NE-3] · R–NE

Committees

Transportation and Infrastructure Committee

0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

Mar 13, 1995
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Feb 28, 1995
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Feb 28, 1995
Introduced in House
Feb 28, 1995
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Introduced in House · Feb 28, 1995 Formatted Text PDF

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Feb 7, 2024. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

Explore the bill from different angles

Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.1071 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.1071, 104th Congress: To direct the Secretary of the Army to deposit $1,400,000 into the Judgment Fund of the Department of Justice to cover those costs of the project for flood control, Lost Creek, Columbus, Nebraska, which are in excess of the $4,000,000 limit on projects carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-bill/1071

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 1995-02-28.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/104/bills/hr1071/BILLS-104hr1071ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2024-02-07T16:05:06Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze H.R.1071 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.1071 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.1071, 104th Congress: To direct the Secretary of the Army to deposit $1,400,000 into the Judgment Fund of the Department of Justice to cover those costs of the project for flood control, Lost Creek, Columbus, Nebraska, which are in excess of the $4,000,000 limit on projects carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-bill/1071

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 1995-02-28.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/104/bills/hr1071/BILLS-104hr1071ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2024-02-07T16:05:06Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.1071 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.1071 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.1071, 104th Congress: To direct the Secretary of the Army to deposit $1,400,000 into the Judgment Fund of the Department of Justice to cover those costs of the project for flood control, Lost Creek, Columbus, Nebraska, which are in excess of the $4,000,000 limit on projects carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-bill/1071

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 1995-02-28.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/104/bills/hr1071/BILLS-104hr1071ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2024-02-07T16:05:06Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.1071 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.1071 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.R.1071, 104th Congress: To direct the Secretary of the Army to deposit $1,400,000 into the Judgment Fund of the Department of Justice to cover those costs of the project for flood control, Lost Creek, Columbus, Nebraska, which are in excess of the $4,000,000 limit on projects carried out under section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-bill/1071

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 1995-02-28.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/104/bills/hr1071/BILLS-104hr1071ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2024-02-07T16:05:06Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.R.1071 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.