Private, no accountPrivacy details: browsing privately, no account needed
You're browsing privately, no account needed. Your region stays in this session and your precise location is never stored.What we store
H.R. 3538 · 111th CongressFailed

Idaho Wilderness Water Facilities Act

Latest action. On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the yeas and naysThe constitutional right of one-fifth of those present to force every member's vote onto the public record. The mechanism behind every roll call you can look up.Read the full definition (opens a new tab): (2/3 required): 225 - 191 (Roll no. 11). · January 20, 2010

Live record from Congress.gov, updated as the official record changes.
What this bill would do
Official summary · Congressional Research Service

Idaho Wilderness Water Facilities Act - Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to issue a special use authorization to each of the 20 owners of a water storage, transport, or diversion facility located on National Forest System land in the Frank Church of No Return Wilderness and the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness in Idaho for continued operation, maintenance, and reconstruction of such facility if it is determined that: (1) the facility was in existence on the date on which the land upon which it is located was designated as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System; (2) the facility has been in continuous use to deliver water for beneficial use on the owner's non-federal land since the date of designation; (3) the owner holds a valid water right for use of the water on such land under Idaho state law, with a priority date that predates such date; and (4) it is not practicable or feasible to relocate the facility to land outside of the wilderness and continue the beneficial use of water on the non-federal land.

Requires the Secretary, in a special use authorization under this Act, to: (1) allow the use of motorized equipment and mechanized transport for operation, maintenance, or reconstruction of a facility, if it is determined that the use is necessary to continue delivery of water to the non-federal land for beneficial uses and, after conducting a minimum tool analysis for a facility, that the use of nonmotorized equipment and nonmechanized transport is impracticable or infeasible; and (2) preclude use of the facility for the storage, diversion, or transport of water in excess of the water right.

Allows the Secretary, in such an authorization, to: (1) require or allow modification or relocation of a facility in the wilderness, as determined necessary, to reduce impacts to wilderness values if the beneficial use of water on the non-federal land is not diminished; and (2) require that the owner provide a reciprocal right of access across the non-federal property, in which case the owner shall receive market value for any right-of-way or other interest in real property conveyed to the United States. Permits the market value to be paid by the Secretary, in whole or in part, by the grant of a reciprocal right-of-way or by reduction of fees or other costs that may accrue to the owner in obtaining an authorization for water facilities.

Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Reported to House with amendment(s)" stage on January 19, 2010. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.

Status
Introduced
In committee
Failed of passage
January 20, 2010
Where this sits in the process
Common questions
Composed from the official record
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?

This bill failed the vote the record describes below. A measure that fails is not revived; the same text has to be introduced again as a new measure.

The record's latest action, on January 20, 2010: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 225 - 191 (Roll no. 11).

Has anyone actually voted on it?

No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.

A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.

Who is behind it?

MICHAEL SIMPSON (R-ID) introduced it on September 8, 2009, and 1 member has since signed on as a cosponsor.

They are 1 Democrat.

Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.

Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.

Vote history

  1. House
    Did not advance · January 20, 2010
  2. Senate
    Not reached
  3. President
    Not reached
No recorded votes yet
No roll call in this Congress cites this bill. Most bills die in committee without ever reaching a recorded floor vote.