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
Creates a regional partnership to coordinate Great Lakes management and conservation efforts.
The problem
The Great Lakes region faces environmental challenges requiring coordinated action across multiple states and stakeholders without unified framework.
The proposal
Establishes a Regional Great Lakes Partnership to coordinate conservation, environmental protection, and resource management strategies among participating states.
The impact
Great Lakes states, environmental organizations, businesses, and communities gain coordinated approach to water quality, habitat, and regional development.
A unified partnership can address water quality, invasive species, and habitat loss more effectively than separate state efforts. Coordinated action prevents one state's pollution from harming downstream neighbors.
Healthy Great Lakes support fishing, tourism, shipping, and recreation industries worth billions annually. Better coordination protects these economic engines for all participating states.
Sharing research, monitoring equipment, and expertise among states reduces duplicate spending. Joint efforts often cost less than separate state programs addressing the same problems.
A partnership can pool research and data from universities and agencies across the region. Better information leads to smarter decisions about protecting the lakes.
New partnerships create another layer of government that could slow decision-making. States may lose flexibility to address their own unique local problems quickly.
The bill doesn't specify who pays for the partnership or its activities. States and federal government may dispute costs, creating budget conflicts.
States may worry about losing control over their own water and environmental policies. A regional body might override state preferences on resource management.
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.