Overview
Title
To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to require publication on the internet of the basis for determinations that species are endangered species or threatened species, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The H.R. 180 bill wants to make sure everyone can see the reasons why a plant or animal is considered endangered by putting that information on the internet. It also wants to make sure that government spending to help endangered species is clear for everyone to check.
Summary AI
The H.R. 180 bill aims to enhance transparency in the Endangered Species Act of 1973. It requires the publication of scientific and commercial data that determine whether species are classified as endangered or threatened on the internet, although certain confidential information may be exempted from disclosure. The bill also mandates federal agencies to disclose their expenditures related to this act and promotes transparency by requiring them to use data provided by state, tribal, and local governments. Additionally, it seeks to ensure litigation costs align with existing laws.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The "Endangered Species Transparency and Reasonableness Act of 2025" seeks to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The main objective of the bill is to increase transparency regarding determinations of endangered or threatened species by requiring the publication of the underlying scientific and commercial data used in these determinations. This data, however, may be withheld in certain circumstances, such as when prohibited by state law or if it involves classified information. Additionally, the bill mandates greater cooperation and data sharing with states, tribes, and local governments. It also aims to make federal expenditure on related lawsuits publicly available through an online database and clarifies how litigation costs should be awarded in accordance with existing law.
Summary of Significant Issues
Transparency Restrictions: One of the key provisions allows states to block the disclosure of certain data if it contravenes state law. While this respects state authority, it could hinder public access to important information about endangered species, potentially affecting transparency and oversight.
Administrative Demands: The requirement to maintain a searchable, publicly accessible database of legal spending necessitates monthly updates, potentially imposing significant administrative burdens on governmental agencies. This could divert resources from other important conservation efforts.
Integration of Local Information: The bill emphasizes utilizing data from state, tribal, and local entities but lacks clarity on how this data will be integrated into decision-making processes. This might lead to inconsistent application across different regions and agencies.
Data Privacy Concerns: Making detailed legal documents and cases accessible online could raise security and privacy issues, especially if these documents contain sensitive information.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Public Access to Information: For the general public, the bill aims to improve transparency about decisions affecting endangered species protection. Access to this information can empower citizens, organizations, and policy-makers to make more informed decisions and hold agencies accountable.
Conservation Efforts: Enhanced transparency and the use of state and local data could improve the scientific basis for conservation decisions. However, restrictions on data disclosure due to state laws may limit these benefits.
Government and Agencies: The bill could place additional administrative burdens on federal agencies required to manage and update information, possibly affecting their ability to execute other parts of their mandate efficiently. Agencies may need to allocate significant resources to comply with new reporting and transparency requirements.
Legal and Conservation Entities: Stakeholders involved in lawsuits related to endangered species might experience changes in the legal landscape due to clarified guidelines on litigation costs. The bill seeks consistency in awarding these costs, which could affect how these stakeholders plan their legal strategies.
Overall, while the bill's aim is to foster transparency and engagement in protecting endangered species, its practical implementation could present challenges due to administrative demands and potential conflicts between federal transparency objectives and state privacy regulations. The effectiveness of the bill would largely depend on how these challenges are addressed and managed by the respective agencies and stakeholders involved.
Issues
Section 2: The provision allows for states to block the disclosure of information if prohibited by state law, potentially limiting transparency and oversight, which may be significant for public access to information regarding endangered species.
Section 4: The requirement to make a searchable database publicly available and updated monthly could result in significant administrative costs without clear benefits, and the resource demands may divert attention away from other agency goals.
Section 3: The amendment does not clearly specify the process or method for integrating 'State, Tribal, and local information' into decision-making, which could lead to inconsistent applications and implementation issues.
Section 13: The requirement for heads of agencies to provide information 'in a timely manner' is vague, potentially leading to varying standards of compliance and operational inefficiencies across agencies.
Section 4: There may be security and privacy concerns regarding making legal case details publicly available, especially those involving sensitive information.
Section 4: Disaggregating attorney fees and expenses by agency account could be complex and lead to misunderstandings if reporting is not clear and consistent.
Section 5: The phrase 'in accordance with existing law' may be ambiguous as it presumes familiarity with external legal documents, which could lead to interpretation challenges or misapplication.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the Act states that the official name of the legislation is the "Endangered Species Transparency and Reasonableness Act of 2025."
2. Requirement to publish on the internet the basis for listings Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Endangered Species Act is updated to include a rule that the Secretary must publish the science and data used for each regulation online. However, this information does not have to be published if a state law prohibits it or if it's classified information from the Department of Defense.
3. Decisional transparency and use of State, tribal, and local information Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The proposed amendments to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 aim to increase transparency by ensuring affected States receive all data used for determining species status and require that the best scientific and commercial data include information from State, Tribal, or county governments.
4. Disclosure of expenditures under Endangered Species Act of 1973 Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill requires the Secretary of the Interior, along with the Secretary of Commerce, to report and make publicly available details about government spending on legal cases related to the Endangered Species Act. It specifies what information must be included in these reports, like the names and details of the cases, the agencies involved, and the costs, while defining terms like "covered agency" and "covered suit."
13. Disclosure of expenditures Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Secretary of the Interior must report yearly on government spending related to certain lawsuits and make the data available online, including details like case names, claims, agencies involved, costs, and attorney fees. This information helps show how much money and resources are involved in these legal cases, while also setting limits on what sensitive information can be shared publicly.
5. Award of litigation costs to prevailing parties in accordance with existing law Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section modifies the Endangered Species Act by updating how litigation costs are awarded to winning parties, aligning it with specific sections of United States law for consistency.