PSI Sci
New here? Follow the money and the votes · Not sure of your district? Find your U.S. House member · Find your state legislators

H.R. 2259: North Fork Watershed Protection Act of 2014

Before you vote › Federal bills

H.R. 2259: North Fork Watershed Protection Act of 2014

113th Congress · introduced 2013-06-05 · Public Lands and Natural Resources · Latest: Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 314.

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

  1. Where it came from: introduced 2013-06-05 · official record
  2. Who proposed it: Rep. Daines, Steve [R-MT-At Large] · what a sponsor is
  3. What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
  4. Where it stands now: Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 314. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
  5. If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

North Fork Watershed Protection Act of 2014

Plain summary

(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on February 28, 2014. The summary of that version is repeated here.) North Fork Watershed Protection Act of 2014 - Withdraws federally owned land or interest in land within the North Fork Lands Withdrawal Area in Montana from: (1) all forms of location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and (2) disposition under all laws relating to mineral and geothermal leasing. Provides that nothing in this Act violates the rights of existing leaseholders or prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from taking any action necessary to complete any requirement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) or the Endangered Species Act of 1973 concerning surface-disturbing activity that occurs on any lease issued before this Act's enactment. Provides that nothing in this Act restricts recreational uses, livestock management activities, or forest management activities allowed on such land.

Congressional Research Service summary (Passed House amended), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

North Fork Watershed Protection Act of 2014

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Passed House amended)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Rep. Daines, Steve [R-MT-At Large] · 1 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

Cosponsors on this site

Sponsor's campaign money: Rep. Daines, Steve [R-MT-At Large] reported raising $4.8 million (2025–2026). Details. Shown for context only; it does not mean any donor supported this bill.

No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.

Sources

Record fed-us-cong113-hr2259 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong113 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong113