PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 26, 2015
Defending Our Great Lakes Act of 2015
This bill requires federal agencies to take immediate actions to prevent the upstream transfer of aquatic nuisance species from the Mississippi River basin to the Great Lakes basin through the Brandon Road Lock and Dam site. The actions must place a special focus on Asian carp species and other aquatic nuisance species of concern to the Great Lakes referred to in the Great Lakes Mississippi River Interbasin Study conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The Army Corps must implement measures to improve the site to prevent the upstream transfer of Asian carp and other aquatic nuisance species swimming through the lock and dam, including by constructing an engineered channel in the approach to the site from the Mississippi River direction.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must implement all appropriate measures around the site on the Illinois River to prevent the upstream transfer of swimming and floating aquatic nuisance species, with a focus on Asian carp species.
Federal entities must take actions for the long-term prevention of the transfer of aquatic nuisance species between the Mississippi River and Great Lakes basins, including through the Chicago Area Waterway System. The Army Corps must design, engineer, and construct flood mitigation and water quality measures on the Chicago Area Waterway System related to preventing such transfer.
People & committees
Rep. Miller, Candice S. [R-MI-10] · R–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E260-261)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. 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.1135 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.1135 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.1135 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.1135 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.