PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Indefinitely postponed by Senate by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5530)
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Feb 16, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Little Butte/Bear Creek Subbasins Water Feasibility Act - Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to participate in the Water for Irrigation, Streams and the Economy Project water management feasibility study and environmental impact statement in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement Between City of Medford and Bureau of Reclamation for the Water for Irrigation, Streams and the Economy Project, dated July 2, 2004.
Authorizes appropriations. Sets the non-federal share at 50% of the Bureau's costs in carrying out this Act. Permits the non-federal share to be in the form of certain in-kind services.
People & committees
Sen. Smith, Gordon H. [R-OR] · R–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Indefinitely postponed by Senate by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5530)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 50.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman without amendment. With written report No. 110-24.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman without amendment. With written report No. 110-24.
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.
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.265 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.265 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.265 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.265 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.