PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

East Rosebud Wild and Scenic Rivers Act

Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.

Official summary

Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Dec 20, 2017

(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the Senate reported version is repeated here.)

East Rosebud Wild and Scenic Rivers Act

(Sec. 3) This bill amends the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate specified river segments of the East Rosebud Creek in Montana as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

Nothing in this bill creates a protective perimeter or buffer zone outside of the designated boundary of the designated river segments.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Tester, Jon [D-MT] · D–MT

Committees

  • Natural Resources Committee
  • Energy and Natural Resources Committee
1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.

  2. Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

  3. Received in the House.

  4. Message on Senate action sent to the House.

  5. Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8185; text: CR S8185)

  6. Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S8185; text: CR S8185)

  7. An errata sheet on written report No. 115-42 was printed.

  8. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 56.

  9. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 115-42.

  10. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 115-42.

  11. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.

  12. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

  13. Introduced in Senate

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze S.501 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine S.501 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine S.501 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine S.501 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.

View full prompt & sources