Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
The bill removes the lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) from the Endangered Species Act (ESA) lists and amends the ESA to bar the Secretary from making any future determination that the species is endangered or threatened. The statutory change is unconditional ("notwithstanding any other provision of law") and applies to all distinct population segments.
Progressives stress conservation harms and procedural bypass.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a direct and narrowly focused substantive statutory change that clearly states its purpose and provides explicit amendment language to the Endangered Species Act to remove and bar future listing of the lesser prairie-chicken.
The bill removes the lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) from the Endangered Species Act (ESA) lists and amends the ESA to bar the Secretary from making any future determination that the species is endangered or threatened.
The statutory change is unconditional ("notwithstanding any other provision of law") and applies to all distinct population segments.
Very narrow but politically charged; absence of compromise features and strong stakeholder opposition lower prospects despite limited scope.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a direct and narrowly focused substantive statutory change that clearly states its purpose and provides explicit amendment language to the Endangered Species Act to remove and bar future listing of the lesser prairie-chicken.
Progressives stress conservation harms and procedural bypass.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives stress conservation harms and procedural bypass.
Likely strongly opposed.
Removing federal ESA protections and permanently barring future listings undermines standard scientific review and legal safeguards for vulnerable species.
They would view this as a rollback of conservation law and precedent that could harm recovery and habitat protection.
Cautious/mixed.
A centrist would want to see clear, recent scientific evidence of recovery before supporting delisting and would object to a permanent bar on future listings.
They prioritize process integrity, reproducible science, and predictable costs to stakeholders.
Generally supportive.
This persona views the bill as limiting federal overreach, reducing regulatory burdens for rural landowners, and protecting local economic activity.
They see a permanent bar as providing finality and certainty for stakeholders.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Very narrow but politically charged; absence of compromise features and strong stakeholder opposition lower prospects despite limited scope.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives stress conservation harms and procedural bypass.
Very narrow but politically charged; absence of compromise features and strong stakeholder opposition lower prospects despite limited scope.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a direct and narrowly focused substantive statutory change that clearly states its purpose and provides explicit amendment language to the Endangered Species Act t…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.