PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Aug 2, 1994
Rio Puerco Watershed Act of 1994 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to: (1) establish a clearinghouse for research and information on the management of the Rio Puerco Drainage Basin; (2) establish an inventory of best management practices and related monitoring activities that have been or may be implemented within the Rio Puerco Watershed Project; and (3) provide support to the Rio Puerco Management Committee to identify objectives, monitor results of ongoing projects, and develop alternative watershed management plans for the Rio Puerco Drainage Basin based on best management practices. Directs the Secretary to prepare a report of appropriate alternatives for the improvement of watershed conditions in the Rio Puerco Drainage Basin. Establishes the Rio Puerco Management Committee to: (1) advise the Secretary on the development and implementation of the management program; and (2) serve as a forum of information concerning the watershed and implementation of best management practices. Directs the Secretary to: (1) report to specified congressional committees on the implementation of this Act; and (2) study and report to such committees on the Rio Grande from Caballo Lake to Sunland Park, New Mexico. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Bingaman, Jeff [D-NM] · D–NM
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 National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 220 - 196 (Roll No. 490).
House roll call 490 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 220 - 196 (Roll No. 490).
House roll call 490 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H10919-10920)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed until Oct. 5.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10804-10805)
Mr. Vento moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 233 - 180 (Roll No. 481).
House roll call 481 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 233 - 180 (Roll No. 481).
House roll call 481 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H10738-10739)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed until Oct. 4.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10664-10666)
Mr. Vento moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-820, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-820, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Natural Resources.
Referred jointly to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Referred jointly to the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with amendments by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S10271-10272)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S10271-10272)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 512.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Johnston under the authority of the order of Jun 27, 94 with amendments. With written report No. 103-306.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Johnston under the authority of the order of Jun 27, 94 with amendments. With written report No. 103-306.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 103-720.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested executive comment from Department of Agriculture, Department of the Interior, and Office of Management and Budget.
Referred to Subcommittee on Public Lands, National Parks.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2788-2789)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.1919 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.1919 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.1919 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.1919 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.