PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 793.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 9, 2000
Authorizes appropriations to the Secretary of the Interior to undertake capital projects for the Recovery Implementation Program for Endangered Fish Species in the Upper Colorado River Basin and the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program. Terminates the authority to implement projects for such Programs at the end of FY 2005 and 2007, respectively. Limits to $100 million the total cost of authorized projects.Authorizes the: (1) Secretary to accept contributed funds from Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, or political subdivisions or organizations thereof, pursuant to agreements that provide for such contributions to be used for capital project costs; and (2) Secretary and the Secretary of Energy, acting through the Western Power Administration, to utilize for such projects power revenues not exceeding $17 million collected pursuant to the Colorado River Storage Project Act. Makes funds available on a matching basis with funds contributed by the above States. Authorizes alternative project funding through loans from the Colorado Water Conservation Board Construction Fund (with specified loan requirements). Authorizes the Secretary to utilize the power revenues, above, for the annual base funding contributions to the programs by the Bureau of Reclamation. Provides funding limits for each Basin Program. Terminates at the end of FY 2011 the authority for the use of power revenues for annual base funding, with an exception. Requires a report from the Secretary to Congress on the use of such revenues. Requires the Administration and the Bureau to maintain sufficient Fund revenues to meet the base funding requirements.States that nothing in this Act shall restrict the Secretary from funding activities or capital projects in accordance with the Federal Government's Indian trust responsibility.
People & committees
Sen. Allard, Wayne [R-CO] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 793.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with an amendment. With written report No. 106-403.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with an amendment. With written report No. 106-403.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 106-658.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1414)
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.2239 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.2239 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.2239 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.2239 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.