PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Sep 21, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on July 26, 2005. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005 - Amends the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and construction of: (1) a project in Kalaeloa, Hawaii, to desalinate and distribute seawater for direct potable use within the service area of the Board of Water Supply, City and County of Honolulu, Hawaii; (2) facilities in Kealakehe, Hawaii, for the treatment and distribution of recycled water and for environmental purposes within the County of Hawaii; and (3) facilities in Lahaina, Hawaii, for the distribution of recycled water from the Lahaina Wastewater Reclamation Facility for non-potable uses within the County of Maui (authorizes the Secretary to acquire land for such facilities). Limits the federal share to 25 percent of the total cost of any such project. Prohibits the use of funds provided by the Secretary for project operation and maintenance. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Akaka, Daniel K. [D-HI] · D–HI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 109-70.
Became Public Law No: 109-70.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7830-7831)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7830-7831)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 264.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7830-7832)
Mr. Fortuno moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S9034-9035)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S9034-9035)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S9018-9052)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 46.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici without amendment. With written report No. 109-33.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici without amendment. With written report No. 109-33.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S893-894)
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.264 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.264 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.264 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.264 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.