PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 16, 2014
Florida Fisheries Improvement Act - Amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) to revise requirements for fishery management in the Gulf of Mexico and the South Atlantic.
Gives regional fishery management councils authority to use alternative fishery management measures in a recreational fishery.
Revises requirements for fishery management plans, especially by exempting certain species from fishery rebuilding requirements, changing how to determine the timelines for rebuilding fisheries, and repealing the requirement for plans to contain catch limits for the red snapper.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes: (1) the collection of funds from fines, penalties, and forfeitures of property for violations of marine resource law to be used for the cost of stock assessments, surveys, and data collection on fisheries; and (2) a citizen owning or leasing an eligible fishery facilities to make an agreement with the Department of Commerce to establish a capital construction fund to provide for the acquisition or reconstruction of a facility.
Requires the Department to make a decision on whether there is a commercial fishery failure because of a fishery resource disaster within 90 days of a receiving a complete estimate of the economic impact of the disaster.
Requires the Gulf Council and the South Atlantic Council to review every five years the allocation of fishing privileges. Authorizes the Councils to delay the review for three one-year periods.
Directs the Department to: (1) arrange for the National Academy of Sciences to study the process of allocating fishing privileges; (2) develop and publish a plan to conduct stock assessments for all stocks of fish for which a MSA fishery management plan is in effect, unless the assessment is not necessary; and (3) report on facilitating greater incorporation of data, analysis, stock assessments, and surveys from nongovernmental sources.
People & committees
Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Introduced in Senate
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 S.2824 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 S.2824 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 S.2824 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 S.2824 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.