PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 29, 2003
Gila River Indian Community Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 2003 - Requires the per capita distribution of funds paid in settlement of claims made in Docket Nos. 236-C and 236-D, Gila River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community v. United States, to enrolled members of the Gila River Indian Community.Requires the Community to prepare a payment role according to specified criteria.Directs the Secretary of the Interior to disburse funds within 30 days after Community approval of the payment roll. Makes special provision for deceased or legally incompetent individuals and minors.Permits payments of eligible individuals not on the roll out of residual funds and Community-owned funds, as specified.Revises the treatment of minors' per capita shares and final disbursement of judgment funds awarded in Dockets 228 and 236-N.Cancels the balance of all outstanding expert assistance loans to the Gila River Indian Community made by the Department of the Interior.
People & committees
Rep. Hayworth, J. D. [R-AZ-5] · R–AZ
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.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior, Justice.
Referred to the House Committee on 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: 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.458 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.458 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.458 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.458 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.