Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
This bill designates the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. It directs the Secretary of the Interior to include the species on the ESA endangered species list, using language that overrides other law.
Progressives emphasize species protection and ESA mechanisms.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrow substantive change that directly amends the legal status of a named species under the Endangered Species Act.
This bill designates the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
It directs the Secretary of the Interior to include the species on the ESA endangered species list, using language that overrides other law.
The bill text is limited to designation and listing; it does not itself appropriate funds or specify critical habitat or recovery measures.
Legislative override of listing process is narrow and plausible but may provoke stakeholder and procedural obstacles, and lacks funding or compromise language.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrow substantive change that directly amends the legal status of a named species under the Endangered Species Act. It clearly identifies the species and the statutory mechanism, and it explicitly integrates with existing ESA provisions. However, the bill omits contextual findings, timelines, funding acknowledgements, treatment of edge cases (e.g., distinct populations or critical habitat), and any added monitoring or accountability provisions.
Progressives emphasize species protection and ESA mechanisms.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize species protection and ESA mechanisms.
Overall supportive; treats the bill as a necessary, science-based step to protect an at-risk marine mammal.
Views federal endangered listing as a crucial trigger for stronger habitat protections and recovery actions.
Generally favorable but cautious; supports listing if backed by science and accompanied by practical implementation plans.
Wants clarity on costs, timelines, and coordination with states, local stakeholders, and businesses.
Skeptical and likely opposed; views immediate ESA listing as federal overreach that may impose burdens on property owners, boaters, and coastal economies.
Prefers state-led or targeted solutions over broad federal listings.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Legislative override of listing process is narrow and plausible but may provoke stakeholder and procedural obstacles, and lacks funding or compromise language.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize species protection and ESA mechanisms.
Legislative override of listing process is narrow and plausible but may provoke stakeholder and procedural obstacles, and lacks funding or…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrow substantive change that directly amends the legal status of a named species under the Endangered Species Act. It clearly identifies the species and the st…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.