PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 25, 2002
Gila River Indian Community Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 2002 - Requires the per capita distribution of funds paid in settlement of claims made in Docket Nos. 236-C and 236-D, Gila River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community v. United States, to enrolled members of the Gila River Indian Community.Requires the Community to prepare a payment role according to specified criteria.Directs the Secretary of the Interior to disburse funds within 30 days after Community approval of the payment roll. Makes special provision for deceased or legally incompetent individuals and minors.Permits payments of eligible individuals not on the roll out of residual funds and Community-owned funds, as specified.Revises the treatment of minors' per capita shares and final disbursement of judgment funds awarded in Dockets 228 and 236-N.Waives repayment of expert assistance loans to the Gila River Indian Community, the Oglala Sioux Tribe, and the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, as specified.
People & committees
Sen. McCain, John [R-AZ] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11224-11227; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S11224-11225; text as passed Senate: CR S11226-11227)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11224-11227; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S11224-11225; text as passed Senate: CR S11226-11227)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 635.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Inouye with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 107-298.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Inouye with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 107-298.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S7375-7378)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S7375)
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: Jun 20, 2025. 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.2799 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.2799 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.2799 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.2799 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.