PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 24, 2001
Western Water Enhancement Security Act - Directs the Federal and State agencies described in the Federal record of decision issued August 28, 2000, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for the CALFED Bay-Delta Program Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and this Act, to continue to operate under the interim governance structure described in such record until July 1, 2002.Directs: (1) the Secretary and the State of California to develop a Governance Board for managing CALFED program operations; and (2) such Federal agencies to develop a program to achieve increased yield and environmental benefits, as well as improved water system reliability, water quality, water use efficiency, watershed management, water transfers, and levee protection.Requires the Governance Board to undertake a competitive grant program to: (1) investigate and identify opportunities for the design and construction of demonstration and permanent facilities to increase yield and improve water quality; (2) carry out design and construction of identified facilities; and (3) conduct research.Requires specific congressional authorization of new CALFED projects.Small Reclamation Water Resources Project Act of 2001 - Amends the Small Reclamation Projects Act of 1956 to: (1) provide that eligible projects shall include, but not be limited to, irrigation projects; and (2) modify loan and grant programs to establish within the Bureau of Reclamation a program for grants and loan guarantees to organizations to carry out reclamation projects, a Small Reclamation Water Resources Management Partnership Program, and a loan guarantee demonstration program.
People & committees
Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-43] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 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 Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 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 Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 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.1985 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.1985 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.1985 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.1985 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.