Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

senate Bill S. 612

The Big Water Infrastructure, Drought Relief, and Drinking Water Deal

Argument in favor

This bill will provide much needed resources for communities looking to improve their water infrastructure and ensure safe drinking water for their residents or mitigate the effects of long-term drought.

Nellie's Opinion
···
12/08/2016
I prefer safe drinking water for ALL HUMANS
Like (14)
Follow
Share
JaxonEvans's Opinion
···
12/08/2016
This bill would be improved by adding protections for the ESA into it.
Like (8)
Follow
Share
K michael's Opinion
···
12/07/2016
Some legislation can wait and be improved. This is not one of those issues. Given the current political climate, working on safety and drought measures must start NOW. Problems can be resolved with future legislation.
Like (7)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

By allowing for increased water pumping to drought-stricken areas of California, this bill ignores the Endangered Species Act by failing to adequately protect endangered fish habitat to help the agriculture industry.

Nina's Opinion
···
12/07/2016
Add protection for endangered species and sacred lands and this is fine.
Like (100)
Follow
Share
David's Opinion
···
12/07/2016
Our water problems are more broad than addressed by the bill. For example, while it discusses drought and flood management, it looks at them only on a region by region basis. What is needed is a comprehensive program to move floodwater to drought stricken areas. And to give EPA more capability to specify and enforce clean water standards. These are not State decisions; they are national.
Like (51)
Follow
Share
Ian's Opinion
···
12/08/2016
Add language to adequately respect the ESA while still providing water to drought stricken areas. We also as a nation (CA in particular) need to rethink water property rights and market design strategies to address fundamental inequalities in how the existing system works.
Like (23)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • EnactedDecember 16th, 2016
    The President signed this bill into law
  • The house Passed December 8th, 2016
    Roll Call Vote 360 Yea / 61 Nay
      house Committees
      Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
      Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
  • The senate Passed May 21st, 2015
    Passed by Voice Vote
      senate Committees
      Committee on Environment and Public Works
    IntroducedFebruary 27th, 2015

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!

Bill Activity

  • action
    Introduced in Senate
  • referral
    Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  • calendar
    Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
  • reported
    Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Inhofe without amendment. Without written report.
  • calendar
    Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 65.
  • vote
    Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
  • action
    Message on Senate action sent to the House.
  • action
    Received in the House.
  • referral
    Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
  • referral
    Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
  • action
    ORDER OF PROCEDURE - Mr. Shuster asked unanimous consent that the question of adopting a motion to recommit on S. 612 be subject to postponement as though under clause 8 of rule 20. Agreed to without objection.
  • action
    Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 949.
  • action
    The rule provides for consideration of the Senate Amendment to H.R. 2028 and consideration of S. 612. S. 612 will be considered under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of general debate on both bills. The resolution also provides for a motion to recommit with or without instructions on S. 612.
  • action
    DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on S. 612.
  • action
    Mr. Doyle, Michael F. moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
  • action
    DEBATE - The House proceeded with ten minutes of debate on the motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to strike the temporary Buy American requirement for iron and steel products used in drinking water projects and replace it with a permanent Buy American requirement.
  • action
    The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered pursuant to the rule.
  • action
    POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the motion to recommit with instructions, the Chair put the question on the motion and by voice vote announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Doyle demanded the yeas and nays and pursuant to the order of the House of December 8, 2016, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the motion to recommit with instructions until a time to be announced.
  • action
    Considered as unfinished business.
  • action
    On motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 184 - 236 (Roll no. 621).
  • vote
    On passage Passed by recorded vote: 360 - 61 (Roll no. 622).
  • action
    Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
  • action
    Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendment to Senate bill.
  • action
    Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to concur in the House amendment to S. 612 made in Senate.
  • action
    Cloture motion on the motion to concur in the House amendment to S. 612 presented in Senate.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to concur in the House amendment to S. 612 with an amendment (SA 5144) made in Senate.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to refer to Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works the House message to accompany S. 612 with instructions to report back forthwith with the following amendment (SA 5146) in Senate.
  • action
    Considered by Senate (Message from the House considered).
  • action
    Cloture on the motion to concur in the House amendment to S. 612 invoked in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 69 - 30. Record Vote Number: 162.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to refer to Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works the House message to accompany S. 612 with instructions to report back forthwith with the following amendment (SA 5146) fell when cloture invoked on the motion to concur in the House amendment to S. 612 in Senate.
  • action
    Motion by Senator McConnell to concur in the House amendment to S. 612 with an amendment (SA 5144) withdrawn in Senate.
  • vote
    Senate agreed to House amendment to S. 612 by Yea-Nay Vote. 78 - 21. Record Vote Number: 163.
  • action
    Pursuant to the provisions of H. Con. Res. 183, enrollment corrections on S. 612 have been made.
  • action
    Message on Senate action sent to the House.
  • topresident
    Presented to President.
  • signed
    Signed by President.
  • enacted
    Became Public Law No: 114-322.

bill Progress


  • EnactedDecember 16th, 2016
    The President signed this bill into law
  • The house Passed December 8th, 2016
    Roll Call Vote 360 Yea / 61 Nay
      house Committees
      Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
      Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
  • The senate Passed May 21st, 2015
    Passed by Voice Vote
      senate Committees
      Committee on Environment and Public Works
    IntroducedFebruary 27th, 2015

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!
    I prefer safe drinking water for ALL HUMANS
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    Add protection for endangered species and sacred lands and this is fine.
    Like (100)
    Follow
    Share
    Our water problems are more broad than addressed by the bill. For example, while it discusses drought and flood management, it looks at them only on a region by region basis. What is needed is a comprehensive program to move floodwater to drought stricken areas. And to give EPA more capability to specify and enforce clean water standards. These are not State decisions; they are national.
    Like (51)
    Follow
    Share
    Add language to adequately respect the ESA while still providing water to drought stricken areas. We also as a nation (CA in particular) need to rethink water property rights and market design strategies to address fundamental inequalities in how the existing system works.
    Like (23)
    Follow
    Share
    "I prefer drinking water for all people" and other similar remarks. First amendment sweetheart, but there are no amendments supporting ignorance of issues. Drain one area of the country and that section becomes endangered. Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Canada, Pennsylvania, New York. These are the places to be drained. Nah! There is no common sense in this. We choose to live, or remain to live in hazardous areas. That is a choice one makes and there is no power to force others to take a knee to provisions of poor choices. Live in a tornado area, expect tornados, live in a hurricane area, expect hurricanes. Benevolent assistance is not denied. Emotionally derived ideologies are not acceptable reasons to drain resources. Doing this is no less legislatively political. As a nation we as a people are being drained by men and women who make up rules and regulations they don't have to live under. but expect us to live under. Precious snowflakes must melt and come to reality.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to focus our funds on Flint before we waste them on a project that ignores them Endangered Species Act.
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    What the fuck? Cornyn took money that was going to be put towards flint and is redirecting it? What an evil prick.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill would be improved by adding protections for the ESA into it.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    This should be State legislation. The Federal Government has no Constitutional authority to fix/correct state negligence. Of course, California wouldn't stand up to the Feds over a smelt that was native to the San Joaquin Delta causing thousands of agricultural acres into tumble weeds. I April 2015 trawl survey, state Fish and Wildlife scientists caught only one of the pinky-sized, politicized fish with an outsized role in California’s water wars. A UC Davis-run hatchery are filled with thousands of baby smelt — where, for now, they’ll stay, generation after generation because the Delta waters are too brackish. My view-the Delta Smelt have been forced to immigrate and may never be allowed to return home. The fish itself is unremarkable — short-lived, tiny and so translucent it’s almost invisible.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Some legislation can wait and be improved. This is not one of those issues. Given the current political climate, working on safety and drought measures must start NOW. Problems can be resolved with future legislation.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill threatens the endangered species act. There has to be a way to help Californians without causing the extinction of native wildlife.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    I think there is a need for the improvement of quality and access of clean water, especially in places like Flint. However I think we need to find a way to have clean water while respecting the environment.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    We must respect the Endangered Species Act first and foremost.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Like Barbara Boxer, I don't like the way this bill tries to micro-manage water policies in drought states like California, or the way it runs contrary to the state efforts in California to consider environmental resources factors in the communities affected by water policy. However, given the current political climate in Washington with a new administration that will alter Democratic power in the Senate, it seems wiser from a Californian's perspective to take the money and run. Especially when the more urgent needs of other Americans will be met by it -- particularly those in Flint, MI, who have waited long enough to have their needs appropriately addressed.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Stop putting things in pork spending bills that truly don't fix the problems then intend too!!
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    I rarely, if ever, discourage improved infrastructure or drinking water improvement, but if it is true that this broadly neglects measures that could severely damage the fishing habitat and agriculture industry, we need to revise the bill first. Furthermore, I question the transparency of this bill.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    More economic thinking about how the ESA has affected our economic system, for better or worse, is a research priority. Economists have not yet estimated the national costs or benefits of the ESA, and no one has even dared to guess, given the complexity of the ESA debate. Furthermore, we need to address a broader question of social order: how we trade secure property rights and protection of endangered species. One person's inalienable right to protect endangered species will need to be balanced against another's inalienable right of self-determination. A better understanding of the economic costs, benefits, trade-offs, and opportunities should fuel a more informative debate over ESA reauthorization.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    I love the reason the Senator from California gave: I hate this bill but I'm worried the one put forth by the next Congress would be even worse. So she is voting for this one. What a way to run a country😠
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Let's create a piece of legislation that doesn't actively violate the ESA. We can be smarter, better managers of our water if we use scientific research and expert knowledge instead of impulse decisions.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    People are more important then animals.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE