How People Voted
 |
 |
17% For, 83% Against
Take Action
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H.R. 3323, The Goleta Water Distribution System Conveyance Act of 2007
- This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
- This bill, or a similar bill, was reintroduced in the current Congress as H.R. 89, The Goleta Water Distribution System Conveyance Act.
Comparing revision saved on May 14, 2008, 19:48:43 (webmaster), with revision saved on May 20, 2008, 19:45:46 (webmaster):
H.R. 3323 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey a water distribution system to the Goleta Water District.
== Detailed Summary ==
<summary>
Goleta Water Distribution System Conveyance Act of 2007 - Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to convey to the Goleta Water District, Santa Barbara County, California, all rights of the United States to the Goleta Water Distribution System of the Cachuma Project, California, subject to valid existing rights and consistent with the terms of a specified agreement.
Provides that after the conveyance, the System shall not be considered to be part of a federal reclamation project and the District shall not be eligible to receive any benefits regarding any facility comprising the System, with an exception for benefits that would be available to a similarly situated entity involving property that is not part of such a project.
</summary>
<!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->
== Status of the Legislation ==
<status>
Latest Major Action: 5/13/2008: Placed5/19/2008: House floor actions. Status: At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Issa objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 393.motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
</status>
<!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->
== Points in Favor ==
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->
== Points Against ==
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->
Cost per :
Learn More
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
There are currently no comments for this bill.