PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.5633 / 114th Congress

Blackfeet Water Rights Settlement Act

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 6, 2016

Blackfeet Water Rights Settlement Act

This bill authorizes, ratifies, and confirms the water rights compact between the Blackfeet Tribe and Montana dated April 15, 2009, as modified to be consistent with this bill.

The tribe and the Fort Belknap Indian Community must agree on their Milk River water rights.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) must: (1) enter into at least one water delivery contract with the Blackfeet Tribe for water from the St. Mary River water right, (2) review the final project design of the Swiftcurrent Creek Bank Stabilization Project and work with the tribe to carry out the project, and (3) carry out specified maintenance projects.

The tribe must grant the United States certain easements and rights-of-way.

The USBR is granted exclusive jurisdiction to authorize the development of St. Mary Unit hydroelectric power. The tribe is granted the exclusive right to develop and market such power.

Interior must allocate water stored in Lake Elwell for the tribe.

Ownership of Birch Creek water delivery facilities is transferred to the tribe.

The tribe must establish a tribal water code, subject to Interior approval.

The water rights of the tribe within the Lewis and Clark National Forest and Glacier National Park are confirmed.

The tribe and the United States must waive certain claims to water rights.

The tribe must: (1) waive claims against the United States regarding specified land and facilities, and (2) withdraw objections to U.S. water rights claims for the benefit of the Milk River Project.

The provisions of this bill expire and related actions and agreements are void if Interior does not publish specified findings or appropriations are not made.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Zinke, Ryan K. [R-MT-At Large] · R–MT

Committees

  • Natural Resources Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.

    2. Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans Discharged.

    3. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

    4. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

    5. Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans.

    6. Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

    7. Introduced in House

    8. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze H.R.5633 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine H.R.5633 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine H.R.5633 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine H.R.5633 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.

    View full prompt & sources