PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Sep 17, 2002
Noxious Weed Control Act of 2002 - (Sec. 3) Directs the Secretary of the Interior to establish a program to provide financial assistance through States to eligible weed management entities to control or eradicate weeds. Requires the Secretary, in developing such Program, to consult with the National Invasive Species Council, the Invasive Species Advisory Committee, and representatives from certain States and Indian tribes and public and private entities.(Sec. 4) Requires the Secretary to allocate funds to States, on the basis of specified criteria, to fund the carrying out by weed management entities of approved projects to control or eradicate weeds. Requires the provision of special consideration for States with approved weed management entities established by tribes, and allows an additional allocation to a State to meet the particular needs and projects that such a weed management entity will address.(Sec. 5) Directs the Secretary to prescribe requirements for applications by States for funding. Requires States to select projects for funding to a weed management entity on a competitive basis, considering various factors, including: (1) the seriousness of the noxious weed problem; (2) the likelihood that the project will prevent or resolve the problem or increase knowledge about resolving similar problems; (3) the extent to which the weed management entity has made progress in addressing noxious weed problems; and (4) whether the project will reduce the total population of a noxious weed within a State.Establishes reporting requirements for grant recipients and States. Limits the Federal share of any project or activity approved by a State or Indian tribe under this Act to 50 percent, with exceptions to meet the needs of underserved areas or to address critical needs.(Sec. 6) Requires the consent of the landowner for any activity carried out under this Act involving real property. Prohibits any project from being undertaken on property that is used for the cultivation of row crops, fruits, or vegetables.Permits a weed management entity to carry out a project to address the noxious weed problem of more than one State only if the entity meets the requirements of the State laws in all States in which the project will occur.Prohibits the use of funding under this Act to carry out projects to: (1) control or eradicate animal pests or submerged or floating noxious aquatic weeds; or (2) protect an agricultural commodity other than livestock or an animal- or insect-based product.(Sec. 7) States that the assistance authorized under this Act is meant to supplement, and not replace, other assistance available for control or eradication of harmful, invasive weeds on public and private lands.(Sec. 8) Authorizes appropriations for FY 2002 through 2006. Limits to five percent the amount of funding made available for a fiscal year for administrative costs of Federal agencies.
People & committees
Sen. Craig, Larry E. [R-ID] · R–ID
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
The committee substitute as amended agreed to by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR 11/19/2002 S11639-11641; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR 11/19/2002 S11639-11641)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 600.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 107-281.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 107-281.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 107-762.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (text of measure as introduced: CR S647-648)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S646-647)
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: 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.198 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.198 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.198 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.198 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.