PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.By Senator Dorgan from Committee on Indian Affairs filed written report. Report No. 111-356.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Dec 1, 2010
Blackfoot River Land Settlement Act of 2009 - (Sec. 4) Extinguishes all claims and all right, title, and interest in and to specified Indian and non-Indian land with respect to resolution of the disputes within the Fort Hall Indian Reservation of the Shoshone-Bannock Indian Tribes located in Idaho, resulting from the realignment of the Blackfoot River by the Corps of Engineers in 1964.
(Sec. 5) Requires the non-Indian land to be held in trust for the Tribes.
(Sec. 6) Transfers the Indian land to Blackfoot River Flood Control District No. 7 for conveyance to the non-Indians acquiring Indian land.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 7) Establishes a tribal trust fund account from which amounts shall be distributed to the Tribes, which they may use for activities related to: (1) construction of a natural resources facility; (2) water resources needs; (3) economic development; (4) land acquisition; and (5) such other purposes they deem to be appropriate.
Establishes an allottee trust account into which amounts shall be deposited into individual Indian money accounts for the allottees.
(Sec. 8) Requires the Secretary of the Interior to pay to the Tribes and the non-Indian landowners such attorneys fees as are approved by them. Limits the total amount of such fees to be paid to 2% of the amounts distributed to the Tribes, allottees, and the non-Indian landowners.
(Sec. 12) Authorizes appropriations, of which, after the payment of attorneys fees: (1) 28% is for deposit into the tribal trust fund account; (2) 25% is for deposit into the allottee trust account; and (3) 47% is to be provided to Blackfoot River Flood Control District No. 7 for distribution to non-Indian landowners and for associated administrative expenses.
Prohibits funds received by the Tribes under this Act from being distributed to tribal members on a per capita basis.
People & committees
Sen. Crapo, Mike [R-ID] · R–ID
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
By Senator Dorgan from Committee on Indian Affairs filed written report. Report No. 111-356.
By Senator Dorgan from Committee on Indian Affairs filed written report. Report No. 111-356.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 664.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Dorgan with amendments. Without written report.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Reported by Senator Dorgan with amendments. Without written report.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 111-631.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 10, 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.2802 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.2802 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.2802 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.2802 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.