PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water. Hearings held at Glasgow, Montana. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 106-1037.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 3, 2000
Fort Peck Fish Hatchery Authorization Act of 2000 - Authorizes the Secretary of the Army to carry out a project at Fort Peck Lake, Montana, for the design and construction of a warm water fish hatchery and such associated facilities.Requires that the Federal share of the cost of design and construction of such project be 75 percent. Requires the Secretary to credit toward the non-Federal share of project costs: (1) the cost to the State of Montana of stocking Fort Peck Lake; and (2) the cost to the State and the counties having jurisdiction over land surrounding the Lake of construction of local access roads to such lake.Provides for the cost of operation and maintenance associated with raising threatened or endangered species to be a Federal responsibility.Directs the Secretary to offer low-cost project power for all hatchery operations.Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Burns, Conrad R. [R-MT] · R–MT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water. Hearings held at Glasgow, Montana. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 106-1037.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S328-329)
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.2027 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.2027 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.2027 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.2027 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.