Overview
Title
To require the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to approve or deny spend plans within a certain amount of time, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill is like a rule that asks a special office in the government to quickly decide on plans about spending money to help fishers after a big problem happens. It says they have to decide fast and tell how to fix a plan if they say "no."
Summary AI
The bill, known as the "Fishery Improvement to Streamline Untimely Regulatory Hurdles post Emergency Situation Act" or the "FISHES Act," requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to decide on spend plans submitted by the Secretary of Commerce within 30 days. If a spend plan is denied, it must be returned with a description of required changes, after which it can be resubmitted. The bill also changes the timeline for reviewing fishery resource disaster determinations under the Magnuson-Stevens Act from 90 days to 30 days.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Overview of the FISHES Act
The proposed bill, titled the "Fishery Improvement to Streamline untimely regulatory Hurdles post Emergency Situation Act," or the "FISHES Act," seeks to streamline the process by which spend plans related to fishery resource disasters are handled. It mandates a timeline for the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to approve or deny these spend plans. Specifically, it sets a deadline of 30 days for the initial decision and outlines procedures for resubmission if a plan is denied. The bill also aims to make approvals publicly available and expedites related disaster review processes within existing legislation.
Significant Issues
One prominent issue with the FISHES Act is the practicality of the 30-day deadline imposed on the Director of the Office of Management and Budget for approving or denying spend plans. This short timeframe could potentially lead to rushed evaluations, especially when complex or detailed analysis is required. Without specific criteria detailing necessary changes when a spend plan is denied, stakeholders may face uncertainty and confusion.
Additionally, there are concerns about accountability and follow-through. The bill does not specify penalties or consequences if the Director or the Secretary fails to meet the stipulated deadlines, which could result in delays without repercussions. This lack of accountability is critical, especially for timely fishery disaster relief efforts.
The bill also requires approvals to be posted on the Office of Management and Budget's website, which raises transparency concerns. Delayed postings could lead to public distrust, potentially exacerbating existing skepticism about government transparency and efficiency.
Finally, the expedited review processes mandated by the bill may strain resources, particularly during times of multiple emergencies, possibly compromising the thoroughness of these reviews. The language around stakeholder consultations is vague, which might lead to inclusion challenges for those involved in fisheries and related communities.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broadly, the FISHES Act aims to enhance the efficiency of response efforts following fishery disasters, potentially leading to faster recovery for affected fisheries, communities, and industries. However, the tight deadlines and lack of detailed criteria could result in inefficacies or disputes, hindering the intended benefits.
For specific stakeholders, such as fishery-dependent communities and industries, the legislation holds the promise of accelerated decision-making, which could translate into prompt financial support and recovery. On the downside, the ambiguity and lack of public consultation guidelines might leave some stakeholders inadequately represented, affecting buy-in and support for conclusions drawn from the planning process.
Moreover, transparency facilitated by publicly available approvals could build public trust, provided there is consistent and timely implementation. Conversely, potential delays or failures in maintaining these updates on the website might result in skepticism about the process.
In essence, while the FISHES Act aims to refine the handling of fishery disaster spending, its efficacy will significantly depend on its implementation and the ability of involved agencies to meet the stipulated timelines without compromising thoroughness or stakeholder engagement.
Issues
The 30-day deadline for the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to approve or deny spend plans may be impractical, especially if complex evaluations are needed, potentially leading to rushed decisions that impact fishery disaster recovery efforts. (Section 2)
The bill lacks specific criteria for what constitutes necessary changes to a spend plan, leading to ambiguity and potential dispute when making these modifications. This creates uncertainty for stakeholders involved in fishery resource management. (Section 2(b)(1))
There is a lack of a clear accountability mechanism if the Director or Secretary fails to meet stipulated deadlines, possibly resulting in delayed responses for fishery disaster relief efforts without consequences. (Section 2)
The acronym 'FISHES Act' does not clearly convey the purpose of the legislation, potentially leading to public misunderstanding about its scope and beneficiaries. (Section 1)
The provision stating that approvals be posted on the Office of Management and Budget website could pose transparency issues if postings are not updated promptly, leading to public distrust. (Section 2(c)(1))
The requirement for expedited disaster review processes with strict timelines may strain resources, potentially compromising the thoroughness and quality of the reviews. This could be particularly problematic during multiple concurrent emergencies. (Section 2(d))
The language involving the Secretary making changes in consultation with the 'relevant requester' is vague, potentially leading to issues surrounding stakeholder engagement and the determination of who qualifies as relevant. (Section 2(b)(2))
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 section specifies the short title of the Act, which can be called the "Fishery Improvement to Streamline untimely regulatory Hurdles post Emergency Situation Act" or "FISHES Act."
2. Approval or denial of spend plans Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the process for approving or denying spend plans related to fishery resource disasters, requiring the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to approve or deny such plans within specific timeframes, providing reasons for any denials, and detailing procedures for resubmissions and public notifications. It also provides definitions for key terms and modifies existing legislation to shorten review times for disaster determinations.