A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
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
This bill amends the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to make several improvements and changes. It requires the Secretary to establish clear demographic and threat-alleviation standards prior to listing a species, and to specify the baseline condition of a species when it is determined to be threatened or endangered. The legislation mandates the creation of regulations for considering voluntary conservation actions when removing a species from the lists. It also adds requirements for recovery plans, including the identification of research gaps and conservation milestones. Furthermore, the bill mandates periodic reports to congressional committees, requires the expansion of an online digital tool to expedite interagency consultations, and orders a study on using digital technology or artificial intelligence to expedite other processes under the Act.
Yes· 3 of 6
- Scored +4
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The legislation improves the Endangered Species Act by establishing clear pre-listing standards, baseline conditions, recovery plan milestones, and expanding digital tools for conservation.
- Scored +4
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill requires periodic reporting to congressional committees on recovery plans and species statuses, and mandates that this summarized information be made publicly available online.
- Scored +3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Private landowners and business owners benefit from clearer standards and structured regulations regarding voluntary conservation actions under the Endangered Species Act.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 2(a)(1) requires the Secretary to establish clear demographic standards and standards for how much threats must be alleviated prior to listing a species, based on the best available data, if it encourages voluntary conservation actions. This is positive because it gives people clear targets to work toward regarding conservation.
-
Section 2(a)(3) directs the Secretary to promulgate regulations explaining how voluntary conservation actions with private landowners and others will be considered when removing a species from the lists, and how to ensure those actions remain effective and implemented. This benefits private landowners and individuals by providing clear, consistent rules for how their voluntary conservation efforts are valued.
-
Section 2(a)(5)(C) allows species that meet established conservation milestones to be prioritized in the allocation of funds for conservation actions. This is a positive outcome for groups and individuals working to recover species, as it directs financial resources toward successful efforts.
-
Section 2(b) expands the use of the Information for Planning and Consultation digital tool to expedite consultations and requires a study on using digital technology or artificial intelligence to automate or expedite reviews. This could positively impact people by speeding up government processes and interactions through technology.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 2(a)(5)(B) requires the Secretary to submit periodic reports at least once every three years to specific congressional committees regarding recovery plans and species statuses, and to make this information publicly available on the United States Fish and Wildlife Service website. While transparency is generally helpful, compiling and managing these extensive reporting requirements for every listed species creates a significant administrative burden and workload for government officials.
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 business owners be better off under this? — Private landowners and business owners benefit from clearer standards and structured regulations regarding voluntary conservation actions under the Endangered Species Act. Would farmers be better off under this? — Farmers and rural landowners gain clearer guidance and predictability regarding how voluntary conservation actions on their property are considered in species listings and delistings.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The legislation improves the Endangered Species Act by establishing clear pre-listing standards, baseline conditions, recovery plan milestones, and expanding digital tools for conservation. Does this invest in rural communities? — By clarifying how voluntary conservation efforts with private landowners and states are valued and incorporated into delisting and recovery, the bill supports rural and agricultural stakeholders.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires periodic reporting to congressional committees on recovery plans and species statuses, and mandates that this summarized information be made publicly available online.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill provides clearer standards and guidelines for voluntary conservation efforts involving private landowners, which can benefit small businesses and landowners interacting with the Endangered Species Act.
- 9/30/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
Pete RickettsRepublican · Nebraska