POLISCOPE
Back to feed
Part ofFlood Control →

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
FEDERALhearing transcript

Senate Hearing on Flood Control and Water Projects (April 1967)

Original title: River basin monetary authorizations -- watershed projects and miscellaneous bills: hearing before the Subcommittee on Flood Control-- Rivers and Harbors of the Committee on Public Works, United States Senate, Ninetieth Congress, first session, on S. 78, S. 423, S. 601, S. 831, S. 988, S. 1340, H.R. 8363, Neshaminy Creek, PA., watershed project Mississippi River Commission nominations California Debris Commission nomination, April 20, 1967.

Record date · July 20, 2026

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

What This Bill Does

This document is a transcript record of a 1967 Senate subcommittee hearing regarding various flood control, river basin, and authorizations. The committee reviewed multiple legislative bills and considered nominations for the Mississippi River Commission and the .

Why it matters

The hearing established the legislative record for federal funding and administrative oversight of critical water infrastructure projects and commissions across the United States.

Who It Affects

Groups the bill's text affects, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

Residents of Neshaminy Creek watershed

The committee reviewed the watershed project impacting local flood control and water management infrastructure.

Directly affected

Mississippi River Commission nominees

The committee reviewed their nominations for appointment to the commission.

Directly affected

California Debris Commission nominees

The committee reviewed their nominations for appointment to the commission.

Key Facts

  • The hearing was held on April 20, 1967, by the Senate Subcommittee on Flood Control-- Rivers and Harbors.
  • The committee reviewed six specific Senate bills: S. 78, S. 423, S. 601, S. 831, S. 988, and S. 1340.
  • The committee reviewed one House bill: H.R. 8363.
  • The agenda included the review of the Neshaminy Creek, Pennsylvania, watershed project.
Show all 6 facts
  • The committee considered nominations for the Mississippi River Commission.
  • The committee considered nominations for the California Debris Commission.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the purpose of this hearing?
The hearing was held to review and discuss various legislative bills related to flood control and river basin , as well as to consider nominations for specific federal water commissions.
Which specific projects were mentioned?
The Neshaminy Creek, Pennsylvania, was explicitly listed as a subject of the hearing.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Follow the record

Votes, people, money & the original source

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Discoveries

1 pattern noticed across the record

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift80% confidence

Omnibus Legislative Review

The committee bundled multiple disparate bills and commission nominations into a single hearing session, indicating a focus on efficient processing of water-related legislation.

Subcommittee on Flood Control-- Rivers and Harbors

Connected Entities

Committee on Public Works, Subcommittee on Flood Control-- Rivers and Harbors, Neshaminy Creek, PA and 2 more
OrganizationCommittee on Public Works“The parent committee of the subcommittee.”Map →
OrganizationSubcommittee on Flood Control-- Rivers and Harbors“The Senate subcommittee conducting the hearing.”Map →
locationNeshaminy Creek, PA“Specific watershed project site under review.”Map →
OrganizationCalifornia Debris Commission“Subject of commission nominations discussed.”Map →
OrganizationMississippi River Commission“Subject of commission nominations discussed.”Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance60
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy10
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz5
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record