PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 110-16.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Mar 28, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Authorizes the construction, operation, and maintenance of St. Louis County arterial road 1151, known as the "Lemay Connector Road" in St. Louis City and County, Missouri, over certain deed-restricted property, notwithstanding specified federal law and any easement or other similar restriction pursuant to those laws that requires the property to be maintained for open space, recreation, or wetland management.
Requires St. Louis County to: (1) ensure that the project is constructed, operated, and maintained in a manner that would not cause any future additional flood damage that would not have occurred without the project; and (2) identify and agree to restrict a nearby parcel of land of equal or greater size to such deed restricted land so that such parcel is maintained for open space, recreation, or wetland management.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Declares that the federal government shall not be liable for future flood damage caused by the project. Makes St. Louis County, Missouri, or its assignee liable for any such damage.
Declares that the deed-restricted property specified by this Act is not eligible for any future disaster assistance from any other federal source.
People & committees
Rep. Carnahan, Russ [D-MO-3] · D–MO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 110-16.
Became Public Law No: 110-16.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Cleared for White House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3076)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S3076)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1924-1925)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H1924-1925)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1129.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1924-1926)
Mr. Oberstar moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Feb 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze H.R.1129 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.
Examine H.R.1129 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.
Examine H.R.1129 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.
Examine H.R.1129 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.