PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 29, 2014
Endangered Species Transparency and Reasonableness Act - (Sec. 2) Amends the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to require the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce, as appropriate, to make publicly available on the Internet the best scientific and commercial data available that are the basis for the determination of whether a species is an endangered species or a threatened species, including each proposed regulation for the listing of a species.
Prohibits the appropriate Secretary from making the information publicly available when: (1) the public disclosure of the information is prohibited by a state law requiring the protection of personal information, and (2) the state requests that the information be withheld.
Requires the appropriate Secretary to execute an agreement with the Department of Defense (DOD) that prevents the disclosure of classified information pertaining to DOD personnel, facilities, lands, or waters.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 3) Requires the appropriate Secretary to: (1) provide to affected states all data that is used as the basis of a determination on whether a species is an endangered species or a threatened species before making a determination; and (2) use data submitted by a state, tribal, or county government in making such a determination.
(Sec. 4) Requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit an annual report detailing federal expenditures for civil actions brought under the ESA containing claims that are based on the actions of the Department of the Interior, the Forest Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Bonneville Power Administration, the Western Area Power Administration, the Southwestern Power Administration, or the Southeastern Power Administration. Requires Interior to make the information available online in a searchable database.
Requires the report to include the total funds expended to respond to ESA lawsuits, the number of full-time federal employees dedicated to ESA lawsuits, attorneys' fees awarded in the course of ESA lawsuits and settlements, and any federal funding used in bringing a claim under the ESA.
(Sec. 5) Replaces the current standard for awarding court costs, including attorney's fees, in citizen suits with the federal judicial code standard for awarding costs to a prevailing party.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Doc [R-WA-4] · R–WA
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 Environment and Public Works.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 233 - 190 (Roll no. 463).
House roll call 463 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 233 - 190 (Roll no. 463).
House roll call 463 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 197 - 225 (Roll no. 462).
House roll call 462 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to require the Secretary of the Interior to consult with affected Indian tribes to ensure that the Federal trust responsibility with respect to Indian tribes is fulfilled when carrying out any provision of H.R. 4315.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on Natural Resources. (consideration: CR H7022-7023; text: CR H7022)
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H7022)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 4315.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that, pursuant to clause 6 of Rule XVIII, the unfinished business was the question of adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 693, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Duffy amendment No. 4.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Holt amendment No. 3, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. Holt demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 693, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Holt amendment No. 3.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the DeFazio amendment No. 2, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Mr. DeFazio demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 693, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the DeFazio amendment No. 2.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 693, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Hastings (WA) amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 4315.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Rodney Davis to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 693 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4315 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 693. (consideration: CR H7007-7024; text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H7015-7016)
Rule H. Res. 693 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 693 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4315 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 403.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-537.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-537.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 17 - 15.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Hearings Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.4315 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.4315 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.4315 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.4315 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.