PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 816.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Jun 16, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on October 22, 2007. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Madera Water Supply Enhancement Act - Declares that the Madera Water Supply Enhancement Project, California, is feasible and that no further studies or actions regarding feasibility are necessary.
Requires all planning, design, and construction of the Project to be undertaken in accordance with a cooperative agreement between the Secretary of the Interior and the Madera Irrigation District. Authorizes the Secretary to enter into a cooperative agreement for the support of Project design and construction. Limits: (1) the total cost of the Project for purposes of determining the federal share; and (2) the federal share of Project capital costs.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Considers capital, planning, design, permitting, construction, and land acquisition costs incurred by the District prior to this Act's enactment to be part of the nonfederal share. Requires the District to receive credit toward the nonfederal share for: (1) in-kind services that the Secretary determines would contribute substantially toward completion of the Project; (2) reasonable costs incurred from participation in the planning, design, permitting, and construction of the Project; and (3) the acquisition costs of lands used or acquired for the Project.
Prohibits the Secretary from providing funds for operation or maintenance. Makes Project operation, ownership, and maintenance the sole responsibility of the District. Directs the Secretary, before obligating funds, to work cooperatively with the District to use plans, designs, and engineering and environmental analyses that have already been prepared by the District. Authorizes appropriations. Terminates the Secretary's authority to carry out this Act 10 years after its enactment.
People & committees
Rep. Radanovich, George [R-CA-19] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 816.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman without amendment. With written report No. 110-384.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman without amendment. With written report No. 110-384.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate 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, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H11805)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H11805)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1855.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11805-11806)
Ms. Bordallo moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E728)
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.1855 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.1855 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.1855 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.1855 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.