PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 217.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Nov 17, 2003
Specifies the distribution and use of funds appropriated on September 19, 1989, in satisfaction of an award granted to the Quinault Indian Nation under Dockets 772-71, 773-71, 774-71, and 775-71 before the United States Claims Court. Requires distribution and deposit of such funds into three accounts (for Principal Amount, for Investment Income, and for Income on Judgment Funds), to be established by the Tribe, maintained separately, and audited annually. Requires use of the Account for Principal Amount to establish a Permanent Fisheries Fund. Exempts the United States from any trust responsibility or liability for funds upon their disbursement to the Tribe.
People & committees
Rep. Dicks, Norman D. [D-WA-6] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 217.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-367.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-367.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 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.2425 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.2425 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.2425 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.2425 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.