Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
This resolution is a non-binding House statement that recognizes the role of pollinators and designates June 15 through June 22, 2025 as National Pollinator Week. It encourages people to observe the week with ceremonies, conservation, and educational activities. It also states the House's intention to work on conserving native pollinators and improving understanding of their importance. It does not create law or require action by federal agencies or the public.
This is a simple resolution considered and adopted by the House only; it does not go to the President, does not become law, and is non-binding.
This House resolution designates June 15 through June 22, 2025, as "National Pollinator Week." It recognizes the ecological and agricultural importance of pollinators (including native bees, butterflies, birds, bats, beetles, and honey bees), cites declines in several pollinator species and the economic value of pollination to U.S. agriculture, and encourages public observance through ceremonies, conservation, and educational activities.
The resolution expresses the House’s intent to continue working to conserve native pollinator species and their habitats and to improve public understanding of their importance.
It is a non‑binding, symbolic statement rather than a law that creates new regulatory requirements or funding obligations.
This measure is a House resolution that is declaratory and time‑limited; such resolutions do not create binding law. While adoption by the House is very likely given the low‑stakes content, the text as written cannot 'become law'—its effect is symbolic unless enacted later into statute by separate legislative action. Judged strictly on 'become law,' the likelihood is essentially nil.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-constructed commemorative resolution: it clearly states the rationale for designation and provides the specific dates and calls to observe National Pollinator Week while remaining appropriately limited in mechanism and scope.
Degree of desired follow‑up: liberals press for concrete funding/regulation while conservatives want to avoid regulatory or fiscal commitments.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Degree of desired follow‑up: liberals press for concrete funding/regulation while conservatives want to avoid regulatory or fiscal commitments.
A mainstream progressive would view the resolution positively as a useful recognition of an environmental and agricultural issue that intersects biodiversity, food security, and ecosystem health.
They would welcome the attention to steep pollinator declines and the stated intent to conserve pollinator species and habitats.
However, they would likely judge the measure as modest and symbolic, wanting it to be followed by concrete policy actions, funding, habitat restoration, pesticide regulation, and targeted support for native pollinators.
A pragmatic, moderate observer would see the resolution as an uncontroversial, awareness‑raising measure that acknowledges a legitimate ecological and agricultural concern.
They would appreciate the emphasis on conservation and education while noting the bill is non‑binding and carries no fiscal implications by itself.
The centrist would view it as a reasonable first step but would look for clear, evidence‑based follow‑up actions that respect cost constraints and balance agricultural productivity with conservation goals.
A mainstream conservative would likely see the resolution as a largely symbolic and non‑regulatory expression of concern that most people can accept, since it simply designates a week and encourages conservation and education.
They would, however, be cautious about any implied move toward federal regulation, restrictions on pesticide use, or unfunded federal programs for habitat restoration that could burden farmers and agribusiness.
Given the text contains no binding mandates or spending, many conservatives would support the resolution or at least not oppose it, while warning against using it as a precursor to regulatory interventions without clear justification and stakeholder consultation.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
This measure is a House resolution that is declaratory and time‑limited; such resolutions do not create binding law. While adoption by the House is very likely given the low‑stakes content, the text as written cannot 'become law'—its effect is symbolic unless enacted later into statute by separate legislative action. Judged strictly on 'become law,' the likelihood is essentially nil.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Degree of desired follow‑up: liberals press for concrete funding/regulation while conservatives want to avoid regulatory or fiscal commitme…
This measure is a House resolution that is declaratory and time‑limited; such resolutions do not create binding law. While adoption by the…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-constructed commemorative resolution: it clearly states the rationale for designation and provides the specific dates and calls to observe National Pollinat…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.