Latest action: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
PACMESA addresses Pacific coastal management and environmental sustainability issues.
The problem
Pacific coastal areas face challenges with resource management, environmental protection, and coordination between federal agencies and local communities regarding marine and coastal policy.
The proposal
The bill establishes or modifies Pacific coastal management structures, likely creating frameworks for sustainable resource use, environmental protection, and stakeholder coordination in Pacific regions.
The impact
Coastal communities, fishing industries, environmental organizations, and federal agencies managing Pacific resources are affected through new policies and management requirements.
May strengthen protections for Pacific marine ecosystems and habitats. Could improve water quality and biodiversity conservation. Establishes clearer environmental standards for coastal activities.
Could improve communication between federal, state, and local governments. May reduce conflicting policies and create unified management approaches. Strengthens partnership mechanisms.
Promotes long-term planning for fishing, tourism, and energy development. Could balance economic activities with environmental needs. Supports industries dependent on healthy coastal ecosystems.
May include local stakeholder input in decision-making processes. Gives coastal residents voice in policies affecting their areas. Promotes transparency and public participation.
New management structures and monitoring systems require funding. Could impose expenses on federal, state, or local budgets. May reduce resources available for other programs.
New environmental rules may limit fishing, development, or energy projects. Could increase compliance costs for industries. May reduce short-term economic activities in coastal areas.
Additional federal oversight might create bureaucratic delays. Multiple agencies coordinating could slow decision-making. May frustrate local governments and businesses.
Coastal communities may disagree on environmental versus economic focus. Different regions have different needs and interests. Could create conflict between stakeholders.
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.
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.