H.R. 184 (119th)Bill Overview

Action Versus No Action Act

Public Lands and Natural Resources|Environmental assessment, monitoring, researchForests, forestry, trees
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Jan 3, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the Subcommittee on Forestry and Horticulture.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

<p><strong>Action Versus No Action Act</strong></p><p>This bill limits the scope of an environmental assessment (EA)&nbsp;or environmental impact statement (EIS) conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for forest management activity on certain public lands to only the following two alternatives: (1) the effects of the forest management activity, and (2) no action.</p><p>The bill applies to any EA or EIS prepared by the Forest Service or the Department of the Interior for a forest management activity on public land&nbsp;that is suitable for timber production and that</p><ul><li>occurs on land designated as an insect and disease treatment area under the&nbsp;Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003,</li><li>is developed through a collaborative process,</li><li>is proposed by a resource advisory committee, or</li><li>is covered by a community wildfire protection plan.</li></ul><p>In the case of the alternative of no action, the Forest Service or Interior must consider whether to evaluate</p><ul><li>the effect of no action on forest health, potential losses of life and property, habitat diversity, wildfire potential, insect and disease potential, and timber production; and</li><li>the implications of a resulting decline in forest health, loss of habitat diversity, wildfire, or insect or disease infestation on potential losses of life and property, domestic water supply in the project area, wildlife habitat loss, and other economic and social factors.</li></ul>

Why people may split

The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.

Watch point

The next hurdle is converting committee movement into a floor coalition.

<p><strong>Action Versus No Action Act</strong></p><p>This bill limits the scope of an environmental assessment (EA)&nbsp;or environmental impact statement (EIS) conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for forest management activity on certain public lands to only the following two alternatives: (1) the effects of the forest management activity, and (2) no action.</p><p>The bill applies to any EA or EIS prepared by the Forest Service or the Department of the Interior for a forest management activity on public land&nbsp;that is suitable for timber production and that</p><ul><li>occurs on land designated as an insect and disease treatment area under the&nbsp;Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003,</li><li>is developed through a collaborative process,</li><li>is proposed by a resource advisory committee, or</li><li>is covered by a community wildfire protection plan.</li></ul><p>In the case of the alternative of no action, the Forest Service or Interior must consider whether to evaluate</p><ul><li>the effect of no action on forest health, potential losses of life and property, habitat diversity, wildfire potential, insect and disease potential, and timber production; and</li><li>the implications of a resulting decline in forest health, loss of habitat diversity, wildfire, or insect or disease infestation on potential losses of life and property, domestic water supply in the project area, wildlife habitat loss, and other economic and social factors.</li></ul>

Passage38/100

This bill has moved beyond introduction, but committee and floor dynamics still determine whether it can build durable support.

CredibilityPartial

How solid the drafting looks.

Contention62/100

The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens0% / 100%
Likely helpedLikely burdened

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • No clear beneficiaries surfaced yet.
Likely burdened
  • No clear downsides surfaced yet.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
Progressive

The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.

Unclear
Centrist

The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.

Unclear
Conservative

The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.

Unclear
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood38/100

This bill has moved beyond introduction, but committee and floor dynamics still determine whether it can build durable support.

Why this could stall
  • The next hurdle is converting committee movement into a floor coalition.
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.

This bill has moved beyond introduction, but committee and floor dynamics still determine whether it can build durable support.

Unlocked analysis

Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Action Versus No Action Act.

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis