H.R. 726 (119th)Bill Overview

Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement Amendments Act of 2025

Native Americans|Dams and canalsGovernment trust funds
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Jan 24, 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 the Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 2010 to restructure accounts and programmatic authorities for Crow water projects. It repeals the prior MR&I System provision, creates two specified accounts (MR&I Projects Account and Crow CIP Implementation Account), clarifies permitted uses of funds, affirms tribal title and operational control of constructed infrastructure, removes any federal obligation to pay operation and maintenance, and adds indexing and technical conforming changes.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize tribal sovereignty and environmental compliance benefits

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive statutory amendment that clearly specifies many legal changes (account creation, repeal, permitted uses, and redesignations) and integrates well with the existing statutory framework, but it provides only minimal problem framing, limited fiscal detail, and limited accountability provisions.

This bill amends the Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 2010 to restructure accounts and programmatic authorities for Crow water projects.

It repeals the prior MR&I System provision, creates two specified accounts (MR&I Projects Account and Crow CIP Implementation Account), clarifies permitted uses of funds, affirms tribal title and operational control of constructed infrastructure, removes any federal obligation to pay operation and maintenance, and adds indexing and technical conforming changes.

Passage55/100

Narrow, technical amendments to a specific tribal settlement typically clear Congress if funding implications are modest and stakeholders support them; appropriations and procedural timing are key caveats.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive statutory amendment that clearly specifies many legal changes (account creation, repeal, permitted uses, and redesignations) and integrates well with the existing statutory framework, but it provides only minimal problem framing, limited fiscal detail, and limited accountability provisions.

Contention25/100

Progressives emphasize tribal sovereignty and environmental compliance benefits

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedFederal agencies

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

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitIncreases tribal ownership and operational control of funded water infrastructure.
  • Potential benefitConcentrates funding into managed accounts, enabling investment earnings and flexibility.
  • Potential benefitFacilitates planning, construction, and rehabilitation of water and wastewater infrastructure on Reservation.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesRemoves federal obligation for operation, maintenance, and replacement, shifting long‑term costs to the Tribe.
  • Potential burdenCreates nontrust accounts, which may alter trust protections or legal status of funds.
  • Potential burdenFunds reverting to the Treasury if unexpended could create fiscal uncertainty for projects.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize tribal sovereignty and environmental compliance benefits
Progressive80%

Likely broadly supportive because the bill strengthens tribal control, funds water and wastewater infrastructure, and requires environmental compliance.

However, advocates would be concerned that the federal government explicitly disclaims O&M obligations and that actual funding depends on future appropriations.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Generally favorable as a technical, implementation-focused fix to an existing settlement, clarifying account structure and eligible uses.

They will want clearer fiscal transparency, timelines, and assurances that indexing and account transfers do not create open-ended federal liabilities.

Leans supportive
Conservative65%

Likely cautiously supportive because the bill affirms tribal ownership, limits ongoing federal obligations, and is primarily technical.

Some conservatives will still scrutinize continued appropriations, indexing that can increase costs, and any perceived expansion of federal-directed funding.

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 likelihood55/100

Narrow, technical amendments to a specific tribal settlement typically clear Congress if funding implications are modest and stakeholders support them; appropriations and procedural timing are key caveats.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • No cost estimate or CBO score included
  • Potential objections from downstream water users or states
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

Progressives emphasize tribal sovereignty and environmental compliance benefits

Narrow, technical amendments to a specific tribal settlement typically clear Congress if funding implications are modest and stakeholders s…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive statutory amendment that clearly specifies many legal changes (account creation, repeal, permitted uses, and redesignations) and integrates well with…

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