PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Sep 17, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Tule River Tribe Water Development Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, by the later of two years after funds are appropriated for this Act or the signing of a reserved water rights settlement agreement by the Tule River Tribe of California and other settling water users, to complete a feasibility study to evaluate alternatives for a domestic, commercial, municipal, industrial, and irrigation water supply for the Tule River Tribe of the Tule River Reservation.
Prohibits any project conducted in relation to that study from providing water supplies for any other Tribal casino, except: (1) the casino in its current form and dimensions operated by the Tribe on the Tule River Reservation; and (2) any lodging, dining, entertainment, meeting space, parking, or other similar facilities which may be constructed in the future in support of current, or any future expansion of, on-Reservation gaming activities.
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.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 9/15/2008 H8053)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 9/15/2008 H8053)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8368-8369)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Bishop (UT) 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 The point of no quorum was withdrawn.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. 2535.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8053-8054)
Ms. Bordallo moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 526.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-812.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-812.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee Without Recommendation by Unanimous Consent .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
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.2535 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.2535 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.2535 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.2535 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.