H.R. 9017

H.R. 9017: To provide that compliance with a certain biological opinion is deemed to be compliance with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 for purposes of a certain agency action, and for other purposes.

Introduced Byron Donalds (R) HOUSE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

H.R. 9017 aims to establish that adherence to a specific biological opinion is considered sufficient for compliance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 regarding a particular agency action. This means that if an agency follows the guidelines outlined in this biological opinion, it will not be required to meet other compliance standards set by the Endangered Species Act.

Positive Media Summary

Supporters of H.R. 9017 argue that the bill streamlines regulatory processes, making it easier for agencies to take necessary actions without facing extensive legal hurdles related to endangered species protections. Proponents believe this will facilitate timely decision-making in critical areas such as infrastructure and resource management.

Negative Media Summary

Critics of H.R. 9017 express concern that the bill undermines the protections established by the Endangered Species Act. They argue that it could lead to significant harm to vulnerable species by allowing agencies to bypass thorough environmental assessments, potentially prioritizing economic interests over ecological preservation.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
3/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$0
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Environmental Protection

The analysis of H.R. 9017, sponsored by Byron Donalds, reveals no direct industry overlaps between the sponsor's top donor industries and the bill's subject matter related to the Endangered Species Act. While there is significant lobbying activity in the policy area, particularly from SKYFRONT and VERDEGO AERO, the absence of direct financial ties to the bill's content suggests a low risk of conflict of interest. The total lobbying contributions from these entities amount to $300,000, but they do not appear to have a direct stake in the specific provisions of the bill, which aims to streamline compliance with environmental regulations. Voters should be aware that while lobbying exists, it does not necessarily indicate a conflict without direct financial connections to the bill's objectives.

Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
VERDEGO AERO THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $200,000
PELION VENTURE PARTNERS THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $38,000
REFORMING AMERICA'S TAXES EQUITABLY (RATE) SURROUND SOUND STRATEGIES, LLC $30,000
ANELLO PHOTONICS THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $30,000
SKYFRONT THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $15,000
47G THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $15,000
GRAIN CHAIN THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $5,000
SKYFRONT THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC undisclosed
ADNEURIS THERAPEUTICS, INC. MAD GLOBAL STRATEGY undisclosed
ALUCHEM INC. MAD GLOBAL STRATEGY undisclosed
JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS CORPORATION undisclosed
JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS CORPORATION JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS CORPORATION undisclosed
GPA MIDSTREAM ASSOCIATION SHUMAKER ADVISORS, LLC undisclosed
WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT DENNIS CARDOZA CONSULTING SERVICES undisclosed
INDUSTRIOUS GROUP INC. THORN RUN PARTNERS undisclosed

Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026

Sponsor's Top Donor Industries

Top industries funding Byron Donalds, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $240,000,000
Individuals: $240,000,000 PACs: $0
Retired $75,000,000
Individuals: $75,000,000 PACs: $0

Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us