HR-9171-119
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 599.
Sponsored by Michael Simpson (R-ID)
What it does
This bill would provide fiscal year 2027 appropriations for the Department of the Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, and dozens of related agencies and programs. Funded entities would include land and resource management bureaus (Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), tribal services (Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Indian Education, Indian Health Service), environmental programs (EPA, Forest Service, Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board), and cultural institutions (Smithsonian Institution, National Endowment for the Arts, National Endowment for the Humanities, U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum). The bill would also set requirements and restrictions on how appropriated funds may be used.
Who benefits
Federal employees and contractors working within funded agencies. Visitors to and communities near national parks, forests, and public lands. Tribal nations and Native American and Alaska Native communities served by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Indian Education, and Indian Health Service. Communities near hazardous waste sites served by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Artists, scholars, and cultural institutions receiving grants from the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities. Energy companies operating on federal lands and offshore areas regulated by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. States and localities that receive federal land management support and environmental funding. Researchers funded through the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
Who is hurt
Taxpayers who bear the cost of all appropriated spending. Programs or agencies whose funding is reduced or restricted relative to prior years or the President's budget request. Industries subject to stricter enforcement if EPA or related agencies receive increased regulatory funding. Competing discretionary spending priorities that may be crowded out by this bill's allocations. State and local governments that may face unfunded mandates if federal program funding is reduced below levels needed to maintain services.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this bill funds essential federal responsibilities — managing 245 million acres of public land, protecting endangered species, providing health care to tribal communities, and maintaining national cultural institutions — that cannot be left to lapse. They contend that consistent annual appropriations ensure operational continuity for agencies like the Indian Health Service, which serves approximately 2.6 million American Indians and Alaska Natives, and the National Park Service, which supports over 300 million annual visits and billions in local economic activity.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that annual appropriations bills like this one often perpetuate baseline spending without rigorous review of program effectiveness, locking in funding for agencies and cultural institutions whose missions could be scaled back, consolidated, or transferred to states and private entities. They contend that funding restrictions embedded in the bill — particularly those governing EPA and land management agencies — may either over-constrain or under-constrain regulatory activity depending on one's view, and that the bill's scope makes meaningful congressional oversight of individual line items difficult.
Constitutional context
Congress's power to appropriate funds derives from the Spending Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 1) and the Appropriations Clause (Art. I, §9, cl. 7). Funding restrictions attached to EPA and agency rulemaking could implicate the major questions doctrine under West Virginia v. EPA (2022) and post-Chevron independent judicial review under Loper Bright v. Raimondo (2024) if riders limit or direct agency regulatory authority in ways that exceed or conflict with underlying statutory mandates.
Checks and balances
Congress holds the power of the purse and gains direct control over agency priorities through funding levels and spending restrictions; the Executive Branch retains discretion in implementing appropriations, and the judiciary may review any funding riders that direct or constrain agency rulemaking authority.
Historical precedent
Annual Interior and Environment appropriations bills have been enacted each fiscal year for decades; the most recent enacted predecessor was the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, which funded these same agencies for FY2024.