Russ Fulcher (R-ID)
Broadband for Americans through Responsible Streamlining (BARS) Act
A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Broadband for Americans through Responsible Streamlining (BARS) Act aims to exempt certain communications projects from specific environmental and historical preservation reviews. It specifically exempts covered projects and certain easements from requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act. The bill also establishes a legal presumption regarding Indian Tribes and certain FCC forms. This presumption suggests that an applicant has made a good faith effort to provide necessary information if a Tribe does not act within 45 days. Additionally, the act modifies existing laws regarding wireless and wireline communications facility requests.
Yes
- Scored +5
Does this get reliable internet to more people?
The bill streamlines the deployment of wireless and wireline communications facilities, which can facilitate broadband expansion.
- Scored +4
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
The bill streamlines the regulatory process for deploying small personal wireless service facilities and other communications projects.
- Scored +2
Does this improve buses, trains and other public transport?
The bill facilitates easier installation of communications facilities in public rights-of-way.
The opposite
- Scored -6
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
The bill creates a presumption that Indian Tribes have disclaimed interest in certain projects if they do not respond within 45 days.
- Scored -6
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill exempts various communications projects from environmental reviews required by the National Environmental Policy Act.
- Scored -3
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill reduces required environmental and historical review processes, which can limit public notice and oversight.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Streamlined Communications Projects: Certain projects, such as those involving the mounting of personal wireless service facilities or those located in floodplains or brownfield sites, would no longer be considered major Federal actions or undertakings under NEPA or the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 2).
-
Easement Efficiency: Federal authorizations for covered easements for communications facilities in a public right-of-way or on property where an easement was previously granted would be exempt from certain environmental and historical reviews (Section 2(b)).
-
Simplified Requests: Eligible facilities requests or wireline communications facilities requests would not be considered major Federal actions or undertakings (Section 2(c)).
-
Disaster Recovery Facilitation: Projects intended to replace or improve communications facilities following a major disaster or emergency declared by a President, Governor, or Chief Executive could proceed without these specific reviews (Section 5(5)(G)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Reduced Environmental and Historical Oversight: By exempting covered projects from the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act, certain communications projects may not be subject to those specific environmental or historical preservation reviews (Section 2).
-
Impact on Indian Tribes: Under certain conditions, if an Indian Tribe does not act on a complete FCC Form 620 or 621 within 45 days, the Commission and courts shall presume the Tribe has disclaimed interest in the undertaking and that the applicant made a good faith effort to provide information regarding historic properties (Section 3(a)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The bill creates a presumption that Indian Tribes have disclaimed interest in certain projects if they do not respond within 45 days.
- Education And Technology
- Does this get reliable internet to more people? — The bill streamlines the deployment of wireless and wireline communications facilities, which can facilitate broadband expansion.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill streamlines the regulatory process for deploying small personal wireless service facilities and other communications projects.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this improve buses, trains and other public transport? — The bill facilitates easier installation of communications facilities in public rights-of-way. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill exempts various communications projects from environmental reviews required by the National Environmental Policy Act.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill reduces required environmental and historical review processes, which can limit public notice and oversight.
- 12/9/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Introduced in House