S. 4439

S. 4439: A bill to require the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere to identify a consistent, Federal set of best available forward-looking meteorological information and to require the Director of the National Institute of Standards and

Introduced Tammy Baldwin (D) SENATE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

The bill S. 4439 aims to mandate the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere to establish a consistent set of best practices for using forward-looking meteorological data. Additionally, it requires the Director of the National Institute of Standards to be involved, likely to ensure that these standards are scientifically robust and widely applicable.

Positive Media Summary

Supporters of the bill appreciate the effort to standardize meteorological data usage, which could enhance the accuracy and reliability of weather forecasts and climate predictions. This initiative is seen as a step toward improving preparedness and response to weather-related events, benefiting sectors such as agriculture, disaster management, and public safety.

Negative Media Summary

Critics may argue that the bill could lead to bureaucratic delays in implementing new meteorological technologies or data analysis methods due to the requirement for federal standardization. There are also concerns about whether the bill adequately addresses the rapid pace of technological advancements in meteorology and whether it provides sufficient flexibility for local agencies to adapt standards to their specific needs.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
2/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$0
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Science, Technology, Communications

The analysis of bill S. 4439, sponsored by Tammy Baldwin, reveals no direct industry overlaps between the bill's subject matter and the sponsor's top donor industries. The bill focuses on establishing a federal standard for meteorological information, which does not appear to intersect with Baldwin's primary donor base. Although there is lobbying activity related to various organizations, the disclosed amounts do not indicate a significant financial influence on the bill's content. The only disclosed lobbying amount is $7,500 from SANA HEALTH, which does not have a clear connection to the meteorological focus of the bill. Therefore, the risk of conflicts of interest is assessed as low, as there is no evident financial incentive for the sponsor to favor specific donor interests in this legislation.

Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

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

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
SANA HEALTH TERRAPIN STRATEGY, INC $7,500
VICTIMS OF TERRORISM - EAST AFRICA MR. RONALD COLEMAN undisclosed
VENUS AEROSPACE CORP. VENUS AEROSPACE CORP. undisclosed
GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY THE CORMAC GROUP, LLC undisclosed
SOIL CULTURE SOLUTIONS, LLC (D/B/A SOILCEA) CORCORAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. DBA CORCORAN PARTNERS undisclosed
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE undisclosed
NEBRASKA RURAL GENERATION LLC JABAL COMPANIES LLC undisclosed
RHOBACK, INC. ATLAS CROSSING LLC undisclosed
GLOBAL MOBILE SOFTWARE LLC TERRAPIN STRATEGY, INC undisclosed
SUMAIR VIRANI COZEN O'CONNOR PUBLIC STRATEGIES undisclosed
NATIONAL STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS TRADE ASSOCIATION COZEN O'CONNOR PUBLIC STRATEGIES undisclosed
NUMERACLE, INC. ACG ADVOCACY undisclosed
AMERICAN COUNCIL FOR CAPITAL FORMATION AMERICAN COUNCIL FOR CAPITAL FORMATION undisclosed
HUBBARD HOUSE RESTAURANT, LLC COZEN O'CONNOR PUBLIC STRATEGIES undisclosed
INTUIT INC., AND ITS ENTERPRISE MEMBERS COZEN O'CONNOR PUBLIC STRATEGIES undisclosed

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

Sponsor's Top Donor Industries

Top industries funding Tammy Baldwin, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $2,147,483,647
Individuals: $2,147,483,647 PACs: $0
Retired $737,500,000
Individuals: $737,500,000 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