Latest action: Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1189 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4690, H. Res. 1182, H.R. 1897 and H.R. 5587. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 4690, H. Res. 1182, H.R. 1897, and H.R. 5587 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate on each measure. The resolution provides for one motion to recommit on H.R. 4690, H.R. 1897, and H.R. 5587.
Committee has approved the bill (usually with amendments) and sent it back to the full chamber.
The committee voted to send the bill to the floor of the full chamber. The Speaker of the House schedules a floor vote.
Next: Passed One Chamber
The other chamber (Senate or House) repeats the committee + floor-vote process
Amends the Endangered Species Act with regulatory changes to species protection and listing procedures.
The problem
Current Endangered Species Act implementation faces debate over balance between species protection and economic activity, with concerns about process efficiency and stakeholder consultation.
The proposal
Modifies ESA procedures for listing species, designating critical habitats, and conducting reviews. Changes consultation requirements and timeline provisions for federal agencies.
The impact
Affects environmental agencies, businesses subject to ESA compliance, conservation organizations, and species recovery efforts through altered regulatory procedures and timelines.
Modified timelines may speed up species listing and habitat designation decisions. Faster processes could reduce regulatory uncertainty for businesses and agencies.
Changes to consultation requirements may expand opportunities for affected parties to participate in decisions. This could improve information quality in ESA proceedings.
Procedural modifications may reduce bureaucratic burden on federal agencies. Clearer processes could lower administrative costs.
Defined procedures and timelines provide businesses clearer expectations about ESA compliance requirements. Greater predictability supports business planning.
Modified listing procedures or timelines could slow species protections. Rushed decisions might inadequately address genuine conservation needs.
Changes to consultation or review processes might limit thorough scientific analysis. This could compromise decision quality for species protection.
Environmental organizations typically oppose ESA modifications reducing protections. Litigation challenging changes could create legal uncertainty.
Modifications affecting critical habitat designation could reduce protected areas. Species recovery efforts might face increased habitat pressures.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
HRES 1606
Expressing support for the designation of the week of October 24, 2026, to October 31, 2026, as "Bat Week".
S 5640
Data Center Transparency Act of 2026
S 5604
Improving Species Recovery Act
S 5653
Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.