PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Nov 19, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the Senate on September 21, 2004. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Tribal Parity Act - Amends the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Infrastructure Development Trust Fund Act to increase from $39.3 million to $186,822,140 the aggregate amount to be deposited into the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Infrastructure Development Trust Fund by the Secretary of the Treasury to provide compensation to the Lower Brule Tribe of South Dakota for damage to tribal land caused by Pick-Sloan projects along the Missouri River.
Amends the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe Infrastructure Development Trust Fund Act of 1996 to increase from $27.5 million to $105,917,853 the aggregate amount to be deposited into the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe Infrastructure Development Trust Fund by the Secretary to provide compensation to the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe of South Dakota for such damage.
People & committees
Sen. Daschle, Thomas A. [D-SD] · D–SD
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 Resources.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11566-11584; text as passed Senate: CR S11577; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S11577)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11566-11584; text as passed Senate: CR S11577; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S11577)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 710.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Campbell with amendments. With written report No. 108-355.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Campbell with amendments. With written report No. 108-355.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 108-620.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR 8/1/2003 S10656)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10656)
Introduced in Senate
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: Jun 20, 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 S.1530 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 S.1530 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 S.1530 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 S.1530 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.