PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1114.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 17, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on July 31, 2008. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Jackson Gulch Rehabilitation Act of 2008 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation to: (1) pay the federal share of the cost of carrying out the Jackson Gulch rehabilitation project in Colorado; and (2) use existing studies relating to the project, including engineering and resource information provided by, or at the direction of, federal, state, or local agencies and the Mancos Water Conservancy District.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) recover the lesser of 35% of the project's cost or $2.9 million as reimbursable expenses from the District over a 15-year period; and (2) credit the District for any amounts it paid before enactment of this Act for engineering work and improvements directly associated with the project.
Makes the District responsible for the operation and maintenance of any facility constructed or rehabilitated under this Act. Shields the United States from liability for damages arising out of any act, omission, or occurrence relating to such a facility.
Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Salazar, John T. [D-CO-3] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1114.
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, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 9/15/2008 H8052)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 9/15/2008 H8052)
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 The point of no quorum was withdrawn.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. 3437.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8052-8053)
Ms. Bordallo moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 527.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-813.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-813.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee Without Recommendation (Amended) 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: Dec 5, 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.3437 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.3437 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.3437 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.3437 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.