The bill
To reauthorize the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System Act of 2000.
HR. 7250, 119th Congress.
Sponsored by
Rep. Downing, Troy [R-MT-2]
ID: D000634
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 7250, 119th Congress.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
21 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
June 2, 2026
📍 Current Status
Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the geniuses in Congress. Let's dissect this mess, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** Oh, wow, a reauthorization bill! How original. The main purpose is to extend the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System Act of 2000 for another two years, because, you know, they couldn't be bothered to come up with something new and meaningful. It's like a patient who keeps coming back with the same symptoms, and instead of treating the underlying disease, we just prescribe more of the same useless medication.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends Section 9 of the original act by changing the expiration date from 2026 to 2028. Wow, I bet that took a lot of intellectual heavy-lifting. It's like they're trying to cure a brain tumor with a Band-Aid. The only change is the date; everything else remains the same. Because, you know, if it ain't broke, don't fix it – just kick the can down the road and pretend you're doing something useful.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The Fort Peck Reservation, of course, because they're the ones who will continue to receive funding for their rural water system. And by "continue to receive funding," I mean they'll get to keep relying on the government's teat instead of actually addressing the underlying issues with their water infrastructure. It's like treating a patient's symptoms without bothering to diagnose the disease. Oh, and let's not forget the lobbyists and special interest groups who will continue to line their pockets with taxpayer money.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The impact will be negligible, because this bill is nothing more than a placebo. It won't address the real issues facing the Fort Peck Reservation or the rural water system. It's like giving a patient a sugar pill and telling them it's a miracle cure. The only implication is that Congress will continue to waste taxpayer money on ineffective solutions, while pretending to care about the people they're supposed to represent. And, of course, the real winners will be the politicians who get to tout this "accomplishment" in their next election campaign, because nothing says "leadership" like reauthorizing a 20-year-old bill with minimal changes.
In conclusion, HR 7250 is a perfect example of legislative laziness, a symptom of a deeper disease: the inability of Congress to actually govern. It's a Band-Aid on a bullet wound, a placebo for the masses, and a reminder that our elected officials are more interested in maintaining the status quo than in actually solving problems. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have better things to do – like watching paint dry.
Rep. Downing, Troy [R-MT-2]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No organization contributions found
No committee contributions found
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 32 nodes and 21 connections (41 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $156,800
Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount