PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 8, 2003
Drinking Water Standards Preservation Act of 2003 - Amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to establish liability standards for a public water system for damages allegedly caused by delivery of contaminated water containing either regulated or unregulated contaminants.Requires for both regulated and unregulated contaminants that there be substantial scientific evidence that the kind of injury alleged could be caused by such substance in the amounts present and that the substance did, in fact, cause the injury.Requires proof, in the case of regulated contaminants, that the water system violated the regulation, was negligent and that the violation caused the injury.Requires proof, in the case of unregulated contaminants, that the water system knew or should have known that the substance at that level was likely to cause such injury and that it was feasible to remove the contaminant to a safe level.
People & committees
Rep. Miller, Gary G. [R-CA-42] · R–CA
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 Commercial and Administrative Law.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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.306 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.306 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.306 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.306 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.