PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 303.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Jul 9, 2009
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House passed version is repeated here.)
Tule River Tribe Water Development Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, to complete and report to specified congressional committees on a feasibility study to evaluate alternatives for the provision of a domestic, commercial, municipal, industrial, and irrigation water supply for the Tule River Tribe of the Tule River Reservation, California. Authorizes appropriations.
Prohibits any project constructed relating to that study from providing water supply for the casino of the Tule River Tribe or any other tribal casino or any lodging, dining, entertainment, meeting space, parking, or other similar facility in support of a gaming activity.
Provides that a water supply provided by a project constructed relating to the feasibility study shall be available to serve: (1) the domestic, municipal, and governmental (including firefighting) needs of the Tribe; and (2) other commercial, agricultural, and industrial needs not related to gaming.
People & committees
Rep. Nunes, Devin [R-CA-21] · 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. 303.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman without amendment. With written report No. 111-153.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman without amendment. With written report No. 111-153.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
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 recorded vote (2/3 required): 417 - 3 (Roll no. 482). (text: CR 7/7/2009 H7713-7714)
House roll call 482 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 417 - 3 (Roll no. 482).(text: CR 7/7/2009 H7713-7714)
House roll call 482 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7756-7757)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Ms. Foxx objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1945.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7713-7714)
Ms. Bordallo 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.1945 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.1945 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.1945 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.1945 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.