PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 15, 2015
Fishing Economy Improvement Act
This bill revises and reauthorizes through FY2021 the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA).
In managing highly migratory species that frequent the exclusive economic zone adjoining U.S. territories, the Department of Commerce must ensure participation of the territories.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
If funds in the Western Pacific Sustainable Fisheries Fund are attributable to a particular U.S. territory, they must be sent to the territory instead of the Western Pacific Council.
Fishery management plans must include descriptions of subsistence or small scale traditional fishing.
The bill makes permanent the authority of Washington, Oregon, and California to adopt and enforce state laws governing fishing and processing in the exclusive economic zone adjacent to their state in any Dungeness crab (Cancer magister) fishery for which there is no fishery management plan in effect under the MSA.
The bill provides for the use of electronic monitoring of fisheries and public participation in the fishery management process by requiring certain meetings be broadcasted online.
Commerce must publish a plan within a year for implementing and conducting the cooperative research and management program.
The Fisheries Conservation and Management Fund is renamed the Zeke Grader Fisheries Conservation and Management Fund.
Commerce must: (1) implement a real-time reporting and data collection program for the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery using available technology, and (2) develop a schedule of stock surveys and stock assessments for the Gulf of Mexico Region and the South Atlantic Region for the next five years and every 5-year period thereafter.
Commerce must: (1) establish partnerships with states to develop best practices for implementing state programs that collect data on recreational fisheries, and (2) provide grants to states to improve implementation of those programs.
Commerce may make grants to support programs that address certain needs of fishing communities.
Commerce is given 90 days to determine if a fishery resource disaster exists for fisheries that originate within the Central Valley Project service area.
Commerce must enter into an agreement with the United States Digital Service for the Service to make recommendations to modernize and streamline the fishery data collection, processing, analysis, and storage systems of the National Marine Fisheries Service.
People & committees
Del. Sablan, Gregorio Kilili Camacho [D-MP-At Large] · D–MP
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E496)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.1826 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.1826 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.1826 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.1826 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.