Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Amends section 118(c)(7)(J)(i) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to add a new subclause authorizing $500,000,000 per year for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031 for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). The bill thus reauthorizes GLRI funding levels for FY2027–FY2031; the text provided specifies funding amounts but does not detail programmatic changes.
Liberals stress environmental and justice benefits; conservatives stress federal spending concerns
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that reauthorizes funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative by adding explicit annual funding amounts into an existing provision of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
Amends section 118(c)(7)(J)(i) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to add a new subclause authorizing $500,000,000 per year for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2031 for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI).
The bill thus reauthorizes GLRI funding levels for FY2027–FY2031; the text provided specifies funding amounts but does not detail programmatic changes.
Modest authorization for an established program increases passability, but actual enactment depends on separate appropriations and Senate procedure.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that reauthorizes funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative by adding explicit annual funding amounts into an existing provision of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. It is precise in its numeric authorization and statutory placement but contains little contextual explanation, no new oversight or accountability provisions, and no fiscal analyses or offsets.
Liberals stress environmental and justice benefits; conservatives stress federal spending concerns
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals stress environmental and justice benefits; conservatives stress federal spending concerns
Likely strongly supportive.
They will view the bill as a meaningful federal investment in Great Lakes cleanup, public health, and ecosystem protection.
They may seek assurances the funding targets restoration, environmental justice, and climate resilience.
Generally favorable but pragmatic.
They will support restoring the Great Lakes if the program has clear oversight, measurable outcomes, and budget transparency.
They will want fiscal clarity on offsets and evidence of cost-effectiveness.
Skeptical to mixed.
They will question the necessity of sustained federal spending and prefer state or local control, private partnerships, or targeted, performance-based grants.
Some regionally focused conservatives may support it for local benefits, but concerns about federal budget impact persist.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Modest authorization for an established program increases passability, but actual enactment depends on separate appropriations and Senate procedure.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals stress environmental and justice benefits; conservatives stress federal spending concerns
Modest authorization for an established program increases passability, but actual enactment depends on separate appropriations and Senate p…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that reauthorizes funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative by adding explicit annual funding amounts into an existing provi…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.