Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
Saving the OOI Act of 2026
A Republican bill with 10 Democratic cosponsors · See all 11 cosponsors
Last activity — Held at the desk.
Passed one chamber, waiting for the other to take it up
Passed one chamber, and the other has not yet sent it to a committee or put it on its calendar.
The other chamber will hand it to a committee, place it on its calendar, or leave it where it is. Nothing has been decided, and a bill can sit here indefinitely.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed Senate voice vote
- Awaiting House
The Senate by voice vote (members called out yes or no together): no senator's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
The "Saving the OOI Act of 2026" stops the National Science Foundation (NSF) from using federal money to descope or decommission Ocean Observatories Initiative instruments. This applies to instruments located in the Irminger Sea and off the coasts of Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and North Carolina. The NSF cannot take these actions until they perform a thorough review of the initiative and the assets it provides. This review must include engagement from coastal communities and the scientific community. Additionally, the NSF Director must keep full and consistent operations running until the review is finished.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +7
Does this put more money into scientific research?
Prevents the loss of critical scientific instruments and mandates continued operations for research.
- Scored +5
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
Protects oceanographic monitoring instruments essential for environmental data collection.
- Scored +3
Would students be better off under this?
Maintains research infrastructure used by students and researchers in oceanography.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
Mandates the maintenance of full and consistent operations of the OOI instruments.
- Scored -1
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
Prevents decommissioning of assets, likely requiring continued federal funding for operations.
- Scored -1
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
Restricts the NSF's ability to descope assets based on its own budget reviews.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of Scientific Assets: The bill prevents the decommissioning or descoping of instruments in Alaska, Washington, Oregon, North Carolina, and the Irminger Sea, which ensures these national assets remain available (Section 2(a)).
-
Community and Expert Input: The bill requires "robust stakeholder engagement" from coastal communities and the scientific community before any changes are made to the initiative (Section 2(a)).
-
Continued Monitoring: The Director of the NSF must maintain full and consistent operations, including monitoring in States where instruments were already decommissioned, until the review is done (Section 2(b)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts for people are explicitly mentioned in the provided text.
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.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — Prevents the loss of critical scientific instruments and mandates continued operations for research.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Positively impacts coastal and rural communities in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest. Would students be better off under this? — Maintains research infrastructure used by students and researchers in oceanography.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Protects oceanographic monitoring instruments essential for environmental data collection.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — Mandates the maintenance of full and consistent operations of the OOI instruments. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Restricts the NSF's ability to descope assets based on its own budget reviews. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — Prevents decommissioning of assets, likely requiring continued federal funding for operations.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires a thorough review and robust stakeholder engagement from the scientific and coastal communities.
- 6/18/2026
- Message on Senate action sent to the House.
- Held at the desk.
- Received in the House.
- 6/17/2026
- Passed/agreed to in Senate: Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Voice Vote.
- Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S2885-2886; text: CR S2885-2886)
- 11 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.
Tammy BaldwinDemocrat · Wisconsin
Maria CantwellDemocrat · Washington
Edward MarkeyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Patty MurrayDemocrat · Washington
Jeff MerkleyDemocrat · Oregon
John ReedDemocrat · Rhode Island
Dan SullivanRepublican · Alaska
Chris Van HollenDemocrat · Maryland
Ron WydenDemocrat · Oregon
Sheldon WhitehouseDemocrat · Rhode Island
Elizabeth WarrenDemocrat · Massachusetts