Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry.
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to contract with a land-grant or non-land-grant college of agriculture to review the Cattle Fever Tick Eradication Program. The review must evaluate program effectiveness, producer benefits and compliance burdens, treatment protocols, and federal/state funding for the most recent fiscal year.
Liberals emphasize environmental, animal welfare, and equity considerations
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory requirement for a contracted review and report.
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to contract with a land-grant or non-land-grant college of agriculture to review the Cattle Fever Tick Eradication Program.
The review must evaluate program effectiveness, producer benefits and compliance burdens, treatment protocols, and federal/state funding for the most recent fiscal year.
Within one year of contract start, USDA must report findings and recommendations to House and Senate Agriculture Committees, including ways to reduce producer compliance burdens.
Modest administrative directive, bipartisan appeal, minimal fiscal impact, and practical benefits to producers make enactment likely if prioritized.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory requirement for a contracted review and report. It establishes clear objectives and timelines and defines key terms, but leaves important operational and resourcing details unspecified.
Liberals emphasize environmental, animal welfare, and equity considerations
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize environmental, animal welfare, and equity considerations
Likely supportive because it mandates independent review, transparency, and attention to producer burdens and program effectiveness.
Would want the review to examine environmental, animal welfare, and small-producer equity impacts, and to result in concrete funding or regulatory changes protecting public and animal health.
Generally favorable as a measured oversight step that promotes accountability and efficiency without immediate regulatory change.
Will want timely reporting, clear cost estimates, and safeguards to avoid disrupting ongoing eradication activities.
Cautiously supportive if the review focuses on reducing regulatory burdens for producers and preserving state control.
Skeptical about additional federal spending or academic-driven recommendations that expand regulation.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Modest administrative directive, bipartisan appeal, minimal fiscal impact, and practical benefits to producers make enactment likely if prioritized.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize environmental, animal welfare, and equity considerations
Modest administrative directive, bipartisan appeal, minimal fiscal impact, and practical benefits to producers make enactment likely if pri…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory requirement for a contracted review and report. It establishes clear objectives and timelines and defines key terms, but leaves importa…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.