Overview
Title
To establish an integrated national approach to respond to ongoing and expected effects of extreme weather and climate change by protecting, managing, and conserving the fish, wildlife, and plants of the United States, and to maximize Government efficiency and reduce costs, in cooperation with State and local governments, Indian Tribes, Native Hawaiians, and other entities, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The SAFE Act is like a new plan to help protect animals, plants, and fish from bad weather and climate changes by having people work together, like the government and Native groups, to make smart choices and not waste money. It also wants people to share important science about climate change, listen to advice from nature experts, and help local places make their own smart plans.
Summary AI
H.R. 9120, the "Safeguarding America’s Future and Environment Act" or "SAFE Act," aims to create a comprehensive national approach for dealing with the impacts of extreme weather and climate change on fish, wildlife, and plants in the United States. The bill emphasizes government efficiency, cost reduction, and collaboration with state and local governments, Indian Tribes, Native Hawaiians, and other entities. It mandates the establishment of a National Fish, Wildlife, and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy Joint Implementation Working Group to coordinate efforts, the creation of a Climate Adaptation Science Center Network to advance climate science, and requires states to develop and implement adaptation plans to receive federal funding. The bill also supports traditional ecological knowledge and encourages co-management with Native communities.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed legislation, referred to as the "Safeguarding America’s Future and Environment Act" or the "SAFE Act," seeks to establish a national strategy to tackle the impacts of extreme weather and climate change. The bill aims to protect, manage, and conserve the United States' fish, wildlife, and plants. It advocates for a coordinated approach involving federal, state, and local governments, along with cooperation from Indian Tribes, Native Hawaiians, and other entities.
General Summary
The SAFE Act outlines a comprehensive framework to address climate change's adverse effects by maintaining ecological resilience and adaptability. It envisions creating a network of Climate Adaptation Science Centers and sets up an Advisory Committee consisting of experts from diverse sectors to guide the strategy development. The bill mandates federal agencies to align their conservation plans with this national strategy and emphasizes the incorporation of traditional ecological knowledge into adaptation measures.
Significant Issues
Several issues arise with the implementation and the broad scope of this bill:
Increased Governmental Expenditure: The establishment of new working groups and networks may significantly increase government spending. The bill does not specify budget constraints or detailed funding mechanisms, which could lead to financial inefficiency or wasteful spending.
Transparency and Accountability: The bill allows for the exemption of certain information from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), particularly sensitive or private information from Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. This broad exemption could potentially limit public scrutiny and reduce transparency.
Coordination and Role Clarity: The bill lacks specificity in coordinating roles among numerous federal and state agencies. This vagueness could lead to overlapping efforts or confusion about each agency's responsibilities, resulting in inefficiencies.
Stakeholder Engagement: Provisions around public notice and stakeholder engagement are unclear, which could result in inconsistent levels of community input and support across different regions. Similarly, the bill's requirement for consultation with Native communities lacks a clear mechanism for accountability.
Broader Public Impact
If successfully implemented, the SAFE Act could have widespread positive effects by preserving biodiversity and enhancing ecosystem resilience, key components in mitigating climate change impacts. Improved ecological health can lead to cleaner air and water, better flood protection, and sustained opportunity for outdoor recreation, all of which contribute to overall public well-being.
However, the absence of defined budgetary oversight could lead to taxpayer concerns about fiscal responsibility. Additionally, the potential lack of transparency and inconsistent stakeholder engagement might erode public trust in the program's intentions and effectiveness.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Federal and State Agencies:
The bill requires these agencies to integrate the national strategy into their operations, which might demand additional resources and administrative adjustments. While this could streamline climate policies across jurisdictions, budget ambiguities might strain current resources.
Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiians:
These communities are given a voice in the strategic process, allowing for the integration of traditional ecological knowledge. However, the bill's broad language on engagement without clear guidelines could result in tokenistic involvement rather than meaningful participation, potentially leading to dissatisfaction and non-cooperation.
Conservation Organizations:
Groups focused on biodiversity preservation stand to benefit from this legislative effort through increased emphasis on ecological and climate resilience. However, the bill’s vague strategies may require these organizations to advocate further for adequate measures and resources to effectively implement necessary actions.
Overall, while the SAFE Act presents an ambitious and necessary approach to addressing climate change impacts on the nation’s natural resources, its success hinges heavily on detailed planning, clear funding mechanisms, and genuine collaborative efforts across diverse stakeholder groups.
Issues
The creation of a new working group as described in Section 4 may result in increased governmental expenditure without clear justification or necessary budget constraints, potentially leading to wasteful spending.
The broad exemption from FOIA in Sections 4(e) and 6(b)(8) could reduce transparency and accountability, allowing sensitive or private information to be overused and withheld from public scrutiny.
The lack of specificity in coordination and role differentiation among various agencies in Section 2 might lead to inefficiencies and overlap in efforts, potentially rendering the policy ineffective.
The use of vague language in Sections 2(c) and 3, such as 'all practicable means' and complex definitions, may lead to a wide range of interpretations and inconsistency in policy implementation and public understanding.
The strategy lacks clear budget specifications for the various initiatives outlined, as seen in Sections 4, 5, and 6, which could lead to questions about financial implications and potential wasteful spending.
The lack of explicit oversight mechanisms in Section 7 to ensure adherence to the strategy implementation plan goals might allow preferential treatment of certain organizations.
The unclear procedures and criteria for public notice and consultation in Sections 5 and 8 could result in variability in how stakeholder engagement is fulfilled, possibly limiting community input and support.
The requirement for states to update adaptation plans every 4 years in Section 8(a) may lead to redundant spending if no significant environmental changes occur within those periods.
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 bill states that it can be referred to as either the “Safeguarding America’s Future and Environment Act” or the “SAFE Act.”
2. Findings, purposes, and policy Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress finds that healthy ecosystems offer numerous benefits like clean air and water, recreation, and climate regulation, but notes that climate change poses significant risks to these resources. The bill aims to address these challenges by establishing a coordinated national response involving various government and local stakeholders to protect and manage the nation's fish, wildlife, and plants effectively.
3. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides definitions for various terms related to climate change and natural resources, such as "adaptation," which refers to adjusting to climate changes, especially in the context of protecting fish, wildlife, and plants. It also clarifies terminology for associated entities and strategies, including the "Committee," a group advising on climate change science, and the "National Strategy," which is a plan for climate adaptation released in 2013.
4. National fish, wildlife, and plants climate adaptation strategy joint implementation working group Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The National Fish, Wildlife, and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy Joint Implementation Working Group will be established by the President within 90 days of the law’s enactment, consisting of leaders from relevant federal and state agencies, and representatives from Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations. The group will facilitate interagency collaboration for the adaptation strategy, with rules around privacy and confidentiality concerning sensitive information shared by Tribe or Native Hawaiian members.
5. National fish, wildlife, and plants climate adaptation strategy Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the adoption and continual revision of a National Strategy by a Working Group to protect fish, wildlife, and plants from climate change. It emphasizes collaboration with stakeholders, regular public updates, and the integration of traditional ecological knowledge, while ensuring that federal agencies align their conservation efforts with this strategy.
6. Fish, wildlife, and plants adaptation science and information Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section establishes a Climate Adaptation Science Center Network led by the Secretary of the Interior, which includes a national center and regional centers to address the impact of climate change on wildlife and plants. It also sets up an Advisory Committee with experts from various sectors to provide guidance on climate adaptation science, review strategies, and collaborate with other federal agencies while ensuring sensitive cultural information remains confidential.
7. Strategy implementation plan Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the creation of a strategy implementation plan by a Working Group for conservation and management in response to climate change, requiring public input and collaboration with Native tribes, and mandating federally-approved plans that adapt based on updated information and integrate traditional ecological knowledge. It also emphasizes cooperation among various entities and ensures federal agencies incorporate resilience to climate change in their conservation efforts.
8. State fish, wildlife, and plants adaptation plans Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Each state must create a plan to address climate change impacts on local fish, wildlife, plants, and coastal areas to receive federal funding, with specific strategies reviewed by the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce. Plans must involve public and scientific input and include collaboration with Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, and, once approved, funding focuses on implementing these plans, requiring periodic updates every four years.