PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 19, 2012
Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act - Requires federal investments in the Upper Mississippi River Basin to be guided by accepted and documented scientific methods and to take into account the results of studies using such methods to identify and quantify the sources, transport, and fate of nutrients and sediment and to quantify the effect of treatment methods or conservation measures on nutrient and sediment management.
Directs the Secretary of the Interior, as part of an Upper Mississippi River Stewardship Initiative and acting through the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), to establish a nutrient and sediment monitoring network for the Basin.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) establish guidelines for related data collection and storage activities; (2) inventory the sediment and monitoring efforts of governmental, tribal, and nongovernmental entities for the purpose of creating a baseline understanding of overlap, data gaps, and redundancies; (3) integrate such monitoring efforts into the sediment and nutrient monitoring network; and (4) collaborate with other public, tribal, and private monitoring and assessment programs in establishing the monitoring network. Directs the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a water resources assessment of the Basin. Requires the Director of the USGS: (1) as part of the Initiative, to develop and implement a plan to improve existing water-quality models to identify and quantify significant sources of sediment and nutrients in the Basin at the subwatershed scale; (2) to establish a communication plan that includes use of the Internet to provide information on accomplishments of public and private programs designed to manage sediment and nutrients in the Basin and on seasonal and annual concentrations and loads of sediment and nutrients in the Upper Mississippi River and its tributaries; and (3) provide an annual report that includes information on concentrations and loads of nutrients and sediment derived from monitoring activities conducted in the Basin.
People & committees
Rep. Kind, Ron [D-WI-3] · D–WI
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 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: Aug 14, 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.4458 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.4458 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.4458 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.4458 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.