To authorize the President of the United States to agree to certain amendments to the Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the United Mexican States concerning the establishment of a Border Environment Cooperation Commission and a North American Development Bank, and for other purposes.
Became Public Law No: 108-215.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 8, 2003
Amends the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act to authorize the President to agree to amendments to the Border Environment Cooperation Agreement (the November 1993 Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the United Mexican States Concerning the Establishment of a Border Environment Cooperation Commission and a North American Development Bank) that: (1) enable the North American Development Bank to make grants and non-market rate loans out of its paid-in capital resources with the approval of its Board of Directors for qualified water conservation projects; and (2) amend the definition of "border region" as it relates to such projects to include specified areas in the United States and Mexico that are within a certain distance of the international boundary between the two countries.Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) water conservation projects are eligible for funding from the Bank under the Cooperation Agreement; and (2) the Board of Directors of the Bank should support qualified water conservation projects which can assist Texas irrigators and agricultural producers in the lower Rio Grande River Valley, including irrigators and agricultural producers in the border States of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, and the financing of projects which address coastal and pollution issues on both sides of the international boundary between the United States and Mexico, including along the Pacific Ocean and Gulf of Mexico shores of both countries.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 377 - 48 (Roll no. 87). (consideration: CR H1494-1495; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 3/24/2004 H1388-1389)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 377 - 48 (Roll no. 87).(consideration: CR H1494-1495; text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 3/24/2004 H1388-1389)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment to H.R. 254.
Mr. Bereuter moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H1388-1393)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate. (consideration: CR S2755-2756)
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
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 of measure as passed House: CR H1343-1344)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text of measure as passed House: CR H1343-1344)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 254.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1343-1351)
Mrs. Biggert moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 11.
Reported by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 108-17.
Reported by the Committee on Financial Services. H. Rept. 108-17.
Ordered to be Reported.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.254 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.254 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.254 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.254 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.