Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Creates the Hawaii Native Species Conservation and Recovery Grant Program administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service. The program will provide competitive grants to Hawaiʻi entities for invasive species control, habitat restoration, climate adaptation, monitoring, research, outreach, and workforce activities.
Support for federal spending level and 10‑year authorization
Targeted state spending may face scrutiny as an earmark; otherwise modest, noncontroversial conservation goals could attract bipartisan support.
Creates the Hawaii Native Species Conservation and Recovery Grant Program administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service.
The program will provide competitive grants to Hawaiʻi entities for invasive species control, habitat restoration, climate adaptation, monitoring, research, outreach, and workforce activities.
It sets coordination requirements, project ranking criteria, recusal rules, cost‑sharing limits (generally up to 75 percent federal share, with some 100 percent exceptions), annual reporting to Congress, and authorizes $30 million per year for ten years.
Modest, non-ideological program improves chances, but state-specific funding and need for annual appropriations reduce certainty.
How solid the drafting looks.
Support for federal spending level and 10‑year authorization
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Support for federal spending level and 10‑year authorization
Likely supportive overall because the bill directs sustained federal funding to protect native Hawaiian species and includes Native Hawaiian consultation.
Would welcome funding for climate resilience, habitat restoration, science, and community engagement, while wanting stronger equity and accountability measures.
Cautiously favorable.
Praises evidence‑based priorities, interagency coordination, and annual reporting, but wants clear performance metrics and fiscal accountability.
Sees value in targeted investment if duplication and administrative waste are minimized.
Skeptical.
Views expansion of targeted, recurring federal grants to a single state as federal overreach and ongoing spending.
Might accept narrow invasive-species or workforce elements, but opposes broad federal preference and open-ended authorization.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Modest, non-ideological program improves chances, but state-specific funding and need for annual appropriations reduce certainty.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Support for federal spending level and 10‑year authorization
Modest, non-ideological program improves chances, but state-specific funding and need for annual appropriations reduce certainty.
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Hawaii Native Species Conservation and Recovery Act of 2025.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.