PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 30, 1993
Amends the Reclamation Reform Act of 1982 to: (1) require only owners of more than 320 acres (currently all landowners) receiving irrigation water to furnish their irrigation district with a certificate of compliance with requirements for the receipt of such water; and (2) empower the Secretary of the Interior to impose penalties not to exceed $1,500 per year for noncompliance with such certification requirements due to error, good faith questions of interpretation, or unintentional omissions. Requires all determinations of noncompliance to be subject to an adjudicatory hearing. Limits all penalties to one year unless the Secretary determines the noncompliance to be the result of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of fact by a landholder.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Robert [R-OR-2] · R–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1680)
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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.2575 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.2575 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.2575 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.2575 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.