H.R. 337 (119th)Bill Overview

To provide technical and financial assistance for groundwater recharge, aquifer storage, and water source substitution projects.

Water Resources Development|Water Resources DevelopmentWater resources funding
Sponsor
Cosponsors
Support
Democratic
Introduced
Jan 13, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill amends Section 40910 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to permit transfers of unobligated balances made available under section 40901. It authorizes up to $3,000,000 per fiscal year for 2026–2031 to the Secretary to carry out subsection (a), which provides technical and financial assistance for groundwater recharge, aquifer storage, and water source substitution projects.

Why people may split

Liberal emphasizes climate resilience and community benefits

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused amendment that creates a limited, multi-year transfer authority to fund groundwater-related assistance under an existing statutory program.

This bill amends Section 40910 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to permit transfers of unobligated balances made available under section 40901.

It authorizes up to $3,000,000 per fiscal year for 2026–2031 to the Secretary to carry out subsection (a), which provides technical and financial assistance for groundwater recharge, aquifer storage, and water source substitution projects.

The change effectively makes up to $18,000,000 available over six years from unobligated balances to support those activities.

Passage40/100

Content is narrow, low cost, and administratively straightforward, increasing chances; standalone small bills often require inclusion in larger vehicles.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused amendment that creates a limited, multi-year transfer authority to fund groundwater-related assistance under an existing statutory program. It is specific about amounts, funding source, statutory placement, and timing but otherwise minimalistic.

Contention55/100

Liberal emphasizes climate resilience and community benefits

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Local governmentsLocal governments

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Local governmentsProvides dedicated federal funds to support groundwater recharge and storage projects, enhancing local water supplies.
  • Local governmentsMay improve drought resilience for agriculture and municipalities through increased subsurface storage capacity.
  • Local governmentsSmall federal grants could leverage larger state and local investments in water infrastructure.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenRedirects unobligated IIJA balances, reducing funds potentially available for other approved projects.
  • Potential burdenTotal authorized transfers ($18 million) may be insufficient for large-scale groundwater needs.
  • Local governmentsExpands federal involvement in water resource management traditionally managed by states and local entities.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Liberal emphasizes climate resilience and community benefits
Progressive90%

Likely supportive because the bill directs federal funds to groundwater resilience, aquifer storage, and water-source substitution projects.

These measures align with climate adaptation, community water security, and environmental protection priorities, though funding is modest.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Generally favorable but cautious.

The bill is narrowly focused and fiscally modest, making it a pragmatic investment in water security.

Centrists will want clear oversight, performance metrics, and assurance the transfers do not erode other priorities.

Leans supportive
Conservative40%

Skeptical but not uniformly opposed.

Concerns center on federal involvement in water management, use of unobligated federal balances, and potential conflicts with state water rights.

The modest dollar amount reduces political heat, but federal overreach worries remain.

Split reaction
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood40/100

Content is narrow, low cost, and administratively straightforward, increasing chances; standalone small bills often require inclusion in larger vehicles.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Availability of unobligated balances to transfer
  • No CBO or cost estimate in bill text
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Liberal emphasizes climate resilience and community benefits

Content is narrow, low cost, and administratively straightforward, increasing chances; standalone small bills often require inclusion in la…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused amendment that creates a limited, multi-year transfer authority to fund groundwater-related assistance under an existing statutory program. It i…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis