PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 399.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 18, 2010
Endangered Fish Recovery Programs Improvement Act of 2010 - Authorizes appropriations for FY2012-FY2023 to provide for the annual base funding for the intergovernmental recovery implementation program for the endangered fish species in the Upper Colorado River and the San Juan River, above and beyond the continued use of power revenues collected under the Colorado River Storage Project Act to fund the operation and maintenance of capital projects and monitoring.
People & committees
Rep. Salazar, John T. [D-CO-3] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 399.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 264 - 122 (Roll no. 273). (text: CR H3489)
House roll call 273 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 264 - 122 (Roll no. 273).(text: CR H3489)
House roll call 273 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3512)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2288.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3489-3491)
Mrs. Napolitano moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 272.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 111-481.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 111-481.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Water and Power Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1074)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.2288 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.2288 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.2288 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.2288 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.