PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 26, 2006
Federal Locks and Lock and Dam Facilities Act of 2006 - Declares that: (1) water and navigational resource projects and facilities are national critical infrastructures and the operation and maintenance of locks and lock and dam facilities constitute inherently governmental functions that require performance by federal employees; and (2) the transfer of such functions to a different agency shall not change such determination.
Permits the Army Corps of Engineers to continue to contract: (1) for private sector performance of such functions that were performed under contracts with the private sector in effect on March 1, 2006, but permits the Corps to use federal employees to perform such functions in the future; and (2) with the private sector to construct new locks and lock and dam facilities.
People & committees
Rep. Evans, Lane [D-IL-17] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
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 15, 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.5204 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.5204 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.5204 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.5204 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.