Roger Wicker (R-MS)
Regional Ocean Partnerships Reauthorization Act
A Republican bill with 8 Democratic cosponsors · See all 13 cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 563.
Cleared committee, waiting for its first floor vote
A committee approved it and it is on the calendar of the chamber it started in.
This is further than most bills get, and still no promise of a vote: the calendar is a queue, and the majority leadership decides what is called. A bill can sit here until the Congress ends.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- On Calendar
What this bill would do
This bill is known as the Regional Ocean Partnerships Reauthorization Act. It updates and continues the funding for Regional Ocean Partnerships by amending the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023. The legislation sets specific funding amounts out to fiscal year 2031. It also adds a funding limitation preventing the partnerships from using these funds to develop regulatory proposals, model regulations, or compliance programs. Additionally, the bill updates reporting requirements and makes technical corrections regarding the definitions and geographical scopes of the partnerships.
Yes· 3 of 22
- Scored +5
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill ensures continued funding for regional ocean conservation and management.
- Scored +4
Does this put more money into scientific research?
Reauthorizes funding specifically for oceanographic research and partnerships.
- Scored +3
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?
Supports the management and protection of marine public resources.
The opposite
- Scored -1
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
The bill authorizes new government spending for fiscal years 2028 through 2031.
- Scored -1
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The bill increases spending by reauthorizing and extending funding for ocean partnerships.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Funding Limitation on Regulations: Under Section 2(6)(C), the bill adds a funding limitation stating that no amounts made available under the subsection may be used to develop any regulatory proposal, model regulation, or compliance program. This could be seen as positive for individuals and groups who want to ensure that these partnerships focus on their core mission without creating new regulations or compliance burdens.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Continued Federal Spending: Under Section 2(6)(A), the bill continues to allocate specific funding amounts for future fiscal years, such as $10,630,812 for fiscal year 2028 and continuing through fiscal year 2031. This could be viewed as a negative by taxpayers concerned with ongoing federal expenditures and the allocation of government funds.
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.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill ensures continued funding for regional ocean conservation and management. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — Supports the management and protection of marine public resources. Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster? — Ocean partnerships often include coastal resilience and storm surge mitigation strategies. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — Ocean partnerships typically focus on ocean health and climate resilience. Does this invest in rural communities? — Benefits coastal rural communities dependent on ocean resources. Does this put more money into wind, solar and other renewable power? — Ocean partnerships may support offshore wind or wave energy research.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Supports businesses in the maritime and blue economy sectors. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Directly benefits coastal rural communities through partnership funding. Would students be better off under this? — Increases funding for research and academic partnerships in ocean sciences. Would children be better off under this? — Promotes a healthier ocean environment for future generations. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Protects coastal resources that low-income fishing communities may rely on. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — May support tribal coastal management and resource protections. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Creates research and career opportunities in marine science.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — Reauthorizes funding specifically for oceanographic research and partnerships.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Extends reporting requirements, which increases public accountability for the funds. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Regional partnerships typically involve state-level stakeholders in decision making. Does this give the federal government more power? — Maintains federal oversight and funding structures for regional partnerships.
- Healthcare
- Does this put more money into medical research? — Funding supports ongoing marine and oceanographic research.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Continued investment in ocean partnerships can stimulate blue economy growth. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Ocean partnerships often involve collaboration with small local marine businesses. Is this likely to create jobs? — Funding for ocean partnerships may support specialized jobs in marine research and conservation. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill increases spending by reauthorizing and extending funding for ocean partnerships. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — The bill authorizes new government spending for fiscal years 2028 through 2031.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this strengthen ties with allied countries? — Ocean partnerships often facilitate international scientific cooperation.
- 9/14/2026
- Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Cruz with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 119-144.
- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 563.
- 4/21/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/14/2026
- Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
- 4/13/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/2/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/24/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/5/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
- 8 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Angela AlsobrooksDemocrat · Maryland
Richard BlumenthalDemocrat · Connecticut
Lisa Blunt RochesterDemocrat · Delaware
Katie BrittRepublican · Alabama
Maria CantwellDemocrat · Washington
Susan CollinsRepublican · Maine
Bill CassidyRepublican · Louisiana
Christopher CoonsDemocrat · Delaware
Maggie HassanDemocrat · New Hampshire
Cindy Hyde-SmithRepublican · Mississippi
John KennedyRepublican · Louisiana
Edward MarkeyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Christopher MurphyDemocrat · Connecticut