PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 494.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Sep 20, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Preserving Rural Resources Act of 2012 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) to replace a requirement that a permit be obtained for any discharge of dredged or fill material into the navigable waters incidental to any activity having as its purpose bringing an area of such waters into a use to which it was not previously subject and where the flow or circulation of such waters may be impaired or the reach of such waters may be reduced with a requirement that a permit be obtained for any such discharge that is not currently exempted from permit requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Hurt, Robert [R-VA-5] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 494.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 112-683.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 112-683.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 30 - 19.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
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: Apr 7, 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.4278 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.4278 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.4278 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.4278 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.