The Aamodt and Taos Pueblo water-rights cases that would settle water rights for pueblos and non-Indians in the Pojoaque Valley and in Taos are moving through Congress.

Bills for both have passed House and Senate committees and are ready for full floor votes. But Jude McCartin, spokeswoman for Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., said the bills aren't likely to go before the Senate for several weeks. "Health care legislation will dominate the Senate," she said. "Legislation like this doesn't get debate time. Usually it becomes part of a critical mass of legislation that advances as one (omnibus) package."

The two water-rights cases are connected because both involve water rights from the San Juan-Chama project and the Rio Grande.

The House Natural Resources Committee approved both bills Sept. 30. Rep. Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., introduced both bills — H.R. 3254, the Taos Pueblo Indian Water Rights Settlement Act, and H.R. 3342, the Aamodt Litigation Settlement Act.

Similar bills in the Senate, S.B. 1105 and S.B. 965 introduced by Sens. Jeff Bingaman and Tom Udall, passed the Indian Affairs Committee. "There was strong backing for both bills," McCartin said.

The Aamodt bills approve a water-rights settlement over the claims of the pueblos of Pojoaque, Nambé, Tesuque and San Ildefonso in the Pojoaque Valley and would fund construction of a regional water system to serve both pueblos and non-Indian residents.

The bills would appropriate $106.4 million to build the regional water system, $5.4 million to purchase water rights and $54 million for a pueblo settlement fund. The federal government would pay the pueblo portion of the cost of the water system; the state and Santa Fe County would pay the nonpueblo portion.

The Aamodt water-rights settlement has been highly controversial, with some residents in the valley still opposing the settlement signed by the state, Santa Fe County and the pueblos.

The Taos Pueblo water-rights bills settle Taos Pueblo's claims in the Taos Valley while protecting water rights of irrigators, community water systems and the town of Taos. The Taos Pueblo settlement has been less controversial because the settlement was negotiated primarily by the pueblo and the acequia irrigators, the two most senior water-rights holders in the valley.

Contact Staci Matlock at 986-3055 or smatlock@sfnewmexican.com.