PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 22, 2023
Continued Rapid Ohia Death Response Act of 2023
This bill establishes requirements to research and control the fungus Ceratocystis, known as Rapid Ohia Death, which has killed more than a million native trees in Hawaii.
Specifically, the Department of the Interior must partner with the Department of Agriculture and Hawaii to control and address the fungus.
In addition, the U.S. Geological Survey must continue to research Rapid Ohia Death vectors and transmission.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must continue to partner with Hawaii and local stakeholders to manage ungulates (e.g., certain mammals such as deer) in Rapid Ohia Death control areas on federal, state, and private land.
Finally, the Forest Service must continue to provide (1) financial assistance to prevent the spread of the fungus and to restore the native forests of Hawaii, and (2) staff and necessary infrastructure funding to the Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry to research the fungus.
People & committees
Rep. Tokuda, Jill N. [D-HI-2] · D–HI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5725)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5725)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1726.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5725-5726)
Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 166.
Committee on Agriculture discharged.
Committee on Agriculture discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-205, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-205, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Federal Lands Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forestry.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1726 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1726 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1726 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1726 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.