PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Indian Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 114-539.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 14, 2016
Columbia River In-Lieu and Treaty Fishing Access Sites Improvement Act
This bill authorizes the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to assess sanitation and safety conditions on BIA land set aside to provide Columbia River Treaty tribes access to traditional fishing grounds. No other federal agency may carry out this assessment.
The BIA may enter into contracts with tribes or tribal organizations to improve sanitation, safety conditions, and access to electricity, sewer, and water infrastructure on this land.
People & committees
Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Indian Affairs. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 114-539.
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: Aug 12, 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.3222 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.3222 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.3222 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.3222 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.