PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-499.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 27, 2000
Authorizes the Commissioner of Reclamation to conduct a study to investigate the opportunities to better manage the water resources in the Salmon Creek Watershed, a tributary to the Upper Columbia River system, Okanagoan County, Washington, so as to restore and enhance fishery resources (especially the endangered Upper Columbia Spring Chinook and Steelhead), while maintaining or improving the availability of water supplies for irrigation practices vital to the economic well-being of the County.
People & committees
Sen. Gorton, Slade [R-WA] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-499.
Became Public Law No: 106-499.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
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 H10519)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H10519)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 2951.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10519)
Mr. Gibbons moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with amendments and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S10527-10528; text as passed Senate: CR S10528)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S10527-10528; text as passed Senate: CR S10528)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 853.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with amendments and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 106-431. (text of measure as reported in Senate: CR 10/13/2000 S10528)
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with amendments and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 106-431.(text of measure as reported in Senate: CR 10/13/2000 S10528)
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 106-903.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.2951 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.2951 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.2951 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.2951 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.