PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jun 2, 2009
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Lower Rio Grande Valley Water Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2009 - Amends the Lower Rio Grande Valley Water Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000 to authorize specified additional projects, including projects for water conservation and improvement in Cameron, Hidalgo, Willacy, Hudspeth, and El Paso counties, Texas.
Permits each project that the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, conducts or participates in to include: (1) the replacement of irrigation canals and lateral canals with buried pipelines; (2) the impervious lining of irrigation canals and lateral canals; (3) the installation of water level, flow measurement, pump control, and telemetry systems; (4) the renovation and replacement of pumping plants; and (5) other activities that will result in water conservation or an improved water supply.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Secretary to transfer among projects up to 10% of amounts made available for such additional projects.
Authorizes appropriations for such additional projects.
People & committees
Rep. Hinojosa, Ruben [D-TX-15] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 H6020-6021)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6020-6021)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1393.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6020-6021)
Mrs. Christensen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
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: Sep 8, 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.1393 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.1393 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.1393 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.1393 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.