Us Congress House Bill HB2185

Us Congress 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/29/23
• Refer: 3/29/23
• Refer: 3/30/23
• Refer: 4/7/23

Caption

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for U.S. Department of Interior,, Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration, Natural Resource Damage Assessment Fund for fiscal year 2024.

Impact

The implications of HB 2185 on state laws primarily revolve around how funding is allocated for environmental damage assessments and subsequent restoration initiatives. With a capped funding amount, the ability of the Department of Interior to effectively carry out comprehensive assessments and restoration projects may be hindered. This limitation could lead to delays or reductions in environmental recovery efforts, particularly in regions affected by significant ecological damage.

Summary

House Bill 2185 is legislation aimed at imposing a funding limitation on the U.S. Department of Interior's Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Fund for the fiscal year 2024. The bill proposes that the funds made available for this purpose cannot exceed $7,767,000. This figure signifies a strategic decision by certain lawmakers to regulate federal spending in the context of environmental restoration efforts, which have drawn scrutiny regarding their costs and effectiveness.

Conclusion

In summary, HB 2185 reflects ongoing debates in Congress about the balance between fiscal restraint and the need for robust environmental protection measures. It highlights the challenges of finding consensus on how to allocate limited federal resources towards significant environmental initiatives while addressing financial concerns. The outcome of this bill may serve as a barometer for future legislative approaches to environmental funding.

Contention

Discussions surrounding HB 2185 may involve notable points of contention, particularly from environmental advocacy groups who may view the funding cap as detrimental to comprehensive environmental protection and restoration efforts. Critics of the bill may argue that limiting funds for such crucial assessments undermines the federal government's ability to respond adequately to environmental disasters and to hold violators accountable for damage caused to public natural resources. Proponents of the bill, however, might defend it as a necessary step for fiscal responsibility and reducing government expenditure on programs they perceive as overfunded.