Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Amends the Dakota Water Resources Act (Public Law 89–108) to authorize new, indexed appropriations for specified North Dakota and tribal municipal, rural, and industrial water projects, set allocation and transfer rules, allow funds for final engineering reports and feasibility studies, revise indexing provisions for construction cost changes, and adjust a Section 11 appropriation.
Several named projects (Northwest Area Water Supply, Eastern North Dakota Alternate Water Supply/McClusky Canal, Southwest Pipeline, multiple rural water districts) and tribal rural water systems (Spirit Lake, Three Affiliated Tribes, Standing Rock, Turtle Mountain, Lake Traverse feasibility) receive specified authorization amounts and timing constraints for engineering work.
Low-controversy, well-specified infrastructure authorizations improve prospects, but significant new spending, need for appropriation action, and Senate procedural barriers reduce likelihood.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly targeted authorization amendment that specifies project‑level funding ceilings, indexing, limited transfer rules, and requirements for final engineering reports and feasibility determinations. It integrates directly into existing statute text and identifies responsible executive authority (the Secretary).
Progressives emphasize tribal water access and public-health gains
Progressives emphasize tribal water access and public-health gains
Likely broadly supportive because the bill directs substantial federal investment to tribal and rural water access, addressing longstanding infrastructure and public-health gaps.
Will watch for strong tribal consultation, environmental safeguards, and commitments for operations and maintenance funding.
Generally favorable to targeted infrastructure spending with defined projects, indexing, and engineering deadlines, but cautious about cost control, fiscal transparency, and measurable delivery schedules.
Will seek reporting, oversight, and clear timelines.
Skeptical of new, large federal authorizations and indexed funding that can expand costs over time; prefers state/tribal financing responsibility and tighter fiscal limits.
May accept targeted projects if offset or constrained by strict controls.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Low-controversy, well-specified infrastructure authorizations improve prospects, but significant new spending, need for appropriation action, and Senate procedural barriers reduce likelihood.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize tribal water access and public-health gains
Low-controversy, well-specified infrastructure authorizations improve prospects, but significant new spending, need for appropriation actio…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly targeted authorization amendment that specifies project‑level funding ceilings, indexing, limited transfer rules, and requirements for final engineering…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.