Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
The bill directs the Army Secretary, through the Chief of Engineers, to prohibit discharges from Lake Okeechobee through the S–308 and S–80 structures when microcystin concentrations exceed the EPA's recommended recreational water criterion. The prohibition applies based on tests by the Secretary, another federal agency, or the State of Florida.
Public health protection versus Corps flood-control operational concerns
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that establishes a single, bright-line operational prohibition for Corps discharges from Lake Okeechobee tied to EPA microcystin recreational thresholds, assigns implementation responsibility to the Secretary of the Army, and permits testing by federal or state entities.
The bill directs the Army Secretary, through the Chief of Engineers, to prohibit discharges from Lake Okeechobee through the S–308 and S–80 structures when microcystin concentrations exceed the EPA's recommended recreational water criterion.
The prohibition applies based on tests by the Secretary, another federal agency, or the State of Florida.
The bill does not specify exceptions, implementation mechanisms, or funding details.
Technically specific and objective but may face operational/legal objections and higher Senate hurdles; lacks funding or compromise mechanisms.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that establishes a single, bright-line operational prohibition for Corps discharges from Lake Okeechobee tied to EPA microcystin recreational thresholds, assigns implementation responsibility to the Secretary of the Army, and permits testing by federal or state entities.
Public health protection versus Corps flood-control operational concerns
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Public health protection versus Corps flood-control operational concerns
Likely supportive because it directly limits toxic algal blooms reaching estuaries and coastal communities.
Sees the measure as a public-health and environmental protection step that forces federal action.
Generally favorable toward protecting public health, but cautious about operational tradeoffs.
Wants clarity on flood control, navigation, testing protocols, and funding before full support.
Likely opposed as an overbroad federal mandate that could interfere with Corps operational duties.
Concerned about flood risk, costs, and federal overreach into state water management.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically specific and objective but may face operational/legal objections and higher Senate hurdles; lacks funding or compromise mechanisms.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Public health protection versus Corps flood-control operational concerns
Technically specific and objective but may face operational/legal objections and higher Senate hurdles; lacks funding or compromise mechani…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that establishes a single, bright-line operational prohibition for Corps discharges from Lake Okeechobee tied to EPA microcystin recrea…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.