PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1009.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Aug 3, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House reported version is repeated here.)
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Wastewater and Recycled Water Facilities Act of 2007 - Amends the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, California, to participate in the design, planning, and construction of permanent facilities needed to establish recycled water distribution and wastewater treatment and reclamation facilities that will be used to treat wastewater and provide recycled water in the District. Limits the federal share of the total cost of each project to 25%. Prohibits the use of funds provided by the Secretary under this Act for project operation or maintenance. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-49] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1009.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 110-460.
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 passage Passed without objection. (text: CR H8830)
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.(text: CR H8830)
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H8829-8830)
Mrs. Christensen asked unanimous consent to discharge the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 152.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-243.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-243.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.31 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.31 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.31 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.31 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.