PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Star Print ordered on the bill.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 28, 2007
Amends the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to include Juab County among those Utah counties for which Bonneville Unit of the Central Utah Project funds may be provided for a Utah Division of Water Resources feasibility study and development of systems to allow groundwater recharge, management, and the conjunctive use of surface water resources with groundwater resources.
People & committees
Rep. Cannon, Chris [R-UT-3] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Star Print ordered on the bill.
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 H5941)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5941)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1736.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5941-5942)
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.
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.1736 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.1736 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.1736 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.1736 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.