Fog Observations and Geographic Forecasting Act
Download PDFSponsored by
Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]
ID: C001098
Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Invalid Date
Introduced
đź“Ť Current Status
Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.
Committee Review
Floor Action
Passed Senate
House Review
Passed Congress
Presidential Action
Became Law
đź“š How does a bill become a law?
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Bill Summary
Another masterpiece of legislative theatre, courtesy of Senators Cruz and Padilla. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Fog Observations and Geographic Forecasting Act (FOGFA) claims to improve forecasts of coastal marine fog, because, apparently, the current system is as clear as a San Francisco morning. The bill's primary objective is to enhance vessel safety and reduce economic impacts from fog events. How noble.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere will conduct a project to improve coastal marine fog forecasts, because that's exactly what we need – more bureaucratic meddling in the name of "safety." The bill outlines various methods to achieve this goal, including:
* Increasing marine-based observations using an array of platforms and technologies (because who needs actual results when you can just throw money at a problem?) * Advancing geographic coverage, resolution, skill, and accuracy of marine fog modeling (read: more funding for NOAA's pet projects) * Improving communication of marine fog advisories (because the public is just dying to receive more government-issued warnings)
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects:
* Vessel operators and owners (who will likely see increased regulatory burdens and costs) * Coastal communities (who might benefit from improved safety, but let's be real, they'll probably just get more bureaucratic red tape) * NOAA and other government agencies (who will receive more funding for their pet projects) * Indian tribes (because the bill includes a token mention of tribal engagement, because optics)
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "solution in search of a problem." The real issue isn't coastal marine fog; it's the politicians' insatiable desire to appear proactive while doing nothing meaningful. FOGFA will likely result in:
* Increased government spending on dubious projects * More regulatory burdens for vessel operators and owners * A negligible impact on actual safety or economic outcomes
In short, this bill is a textbook example of legislative malpractice – a pointless exercise in bureaucratic busywork designed to placate special interests and pad the resumes of its sponsors. Bravo, Senators Cruz and Padilla. You've managed to create a bill that's as murky as the fog it claims to address.
Related Topics
đź’° Campaign Finance Network
Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No committee contributions found
No individual contributions found
Donor Network - Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 27 nodes and 30 connections
Total contributions: $1,532,371
Top Donors - Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]
Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount
Project 2025 Policy Matches
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.
Introduction
— 675 — Department of Commerce l The National Ocean Service (NOS); l The Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR); l The National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service (NESDIS); l The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS); and l The Office of Marine and Aviation Operations and NOAA Corps. Together, these form a colossal operation that has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity. This industry’s mission emphasis on prediction and management seems designed around the fatal conceit of planning for the unplannable. That is not to say NOAA is useless, but its current organization corrupts its useful func- tions. It should be broken up and downsized. NOAA today boasts that it is a provider of environmental information services, a provider of environmental stewardship services, and a leader in applied scientific research. Each of these functions could be provided commercially, likely at lower cost and higher quality. Focus the NWS on Commercial Operations. Each day, Americans rely on weather forecasts and warnings provided by local radio stations and colleges that are produced not by the NWS, but by private companies such as AccuWeather. Studies have found that the forecasts and warnings provided by the private com- panies are more reliable than those provided by the NWS.2 The NWS provides data the private companies use and should focus on its data-gathering services. Because private companies rely on these data, the NWS should fully commercialize its forecasting operations. NOAA does not currently utilize commercial partnerships as some other agencies do. Commercialization of weather technologies should be prioritized to ensure that taxpayer dollars are invested in the most cost-efficient technol- ogies for high quality research and weather data. Investing in different sizes of commercial partners will increase competition while ensuring that the govern- ment solutions provided by each contract is personalized to the needs of NOAA’s weather programs. The NWS should be a candidate to become a Performance-Based Organization to better enforce organizational focus on core functions such as efficient delivery of accurate, timely, and unbiased data to the public and to the private sector.3 Review the Work of the National Hurricane Center and the National Environmental Satellite Service. The National Hurricane Center and National Environmental Satellite Service data centers provide important public safety and
Introduction
— 675 — Department of Commerce l The National Ocean Service (NOS); l The Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR); l The National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service (NESDIS); l The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS); and l The Office of Marine and Aviation Operations and NOAA Corps. Together, these form a colossal operation that has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity. This industry’s mission emphasis on prediction and management seems designed around the fatal conceit of planning for the unplannable. That is not to say NOAA is useless, but its current organization corrupts its useful func- tions. It should be broken up and downsized. NOAA today boasts that it is a provider of environmental information services, a provider of environmental stewardship services, and a leader in applied scientific research. Each of these functions could be provided commercially, likely at lower cost and higher quality. Focus the NWS on Commercial Operations. Each day, Americans rely on weather forecasts and warnings provided by local radio stations and colleges that are produced not by the NWS, but by private companies such as AccuWeather. Studies have found that the forecasts and warnings provided by the private com- panies are more reliable than those provided by the NWS.2 The NWS provides data the private companies use and should focus on its data-gathering services. Because private companies rely on these data, the NWS should fully commercialize its forecasting operations. NOAA does not currently utilize commercial partnerships as some other agencies do. Commercialization of weather technologies should be prioritized to ensure that taxpayer dollars are invested in the most cost-efficient technol- ogies for high quality research and weather data. Investing in different sizes of commercial partners will increase competition while ensuring that the govern- ment solutions provided by each contract is personalized to the needs of NOAA’s weather programs. The NWS should be a candidate to become a Performance-Based Organization to better enforce organizational focus on core functions such as efficient delivery of accurate, timely, and unbiased data to the public and to the private sector.3 Review the Work of the National Hurricane Center and the National Environmental Satellite Service. The National Hurricane Center and National Environmental Satellite Service data centers provide important public safety and — 676 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise business functions as well as academic functions, and are used by forecasting agen- cies and scientists internationally. Data continuity is an important issue in climate science. Data collected by the department should be presented neutrally, without adjustments intended to support any one side in the climate debate. Transfer NOS Survey Functions to the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Geo- logical Survey. Survey operations have historically accounted for almost half the NOS budget. These functions could be transferred to the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Geological Survey to increase efficiency. NOS’ expansion of the National Marine Sanctuaries System should also be reviewed, as discussed below. Streamline NMFS. Overlap exists between the National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Overly simplified, the NMFS handles saltwater species while the Fish and Wildlife Service focuses on fresh water. The goals of these two agencies should be streamlined. Harmonize the Magnuson–Stevens Act with the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. Under the auspices of NOS, marine sanctuaries (including no-fishing zones) are being established country-wide, often conflicting with the goals of the Magnu- son–Stevens Act fisheries management authorities of NOAA Fisheries, regional fishery management councils, and relevant states. Withdraw the 30x30 Executive Order and Associated America the Beautiful Ini- tiative. The 30x30 Executive Order and the American the Beautiful Initiative are being used to advance an agenda to close vast areas of the ocean to commercial activities, including fishing, while rapidly advancing offshore wind energy devel- opment to the detriment of fisheries and other existing ocean-based industries. Modify Regulations Implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act. These acts are currently being abused at a cost to fisheries and Native American subsistence activities around the U.S. Allow a NEPA Exemption for Fisheries Actions. All the requirements for robust analysis of the biological, economic, and social impacts of proposed regulatory action in fisheries are contained with the Magnuson–Stevens Act, the guiding Act for fisheries. NEPA overlays these requirements with onerous, redundant, and time-consuming process requirements, which routinely cause unnecessary delays in the promulgation of timely fisheries management actions. The Department of Commerce and the Council on Environmental Quality should collaborate to reduce this redundancy. Downsize the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research. OAR provides theoretical science, as opposed to the applied science of the National Hurricane Center. OAR is, however, the source of much of NOAA’s climate alarmism. The preponderance of its climate-change research should be disbanded. OAR is a large network of research laboratories, an undersea research center, and several joint research institutes with universities. These operations should be reviewed with an aim of consolidation and reduction of bloat.
Introduction
— 425 — Environmental Protection Agency are statutorily required, and remove any regulatory differences between attainment and maintenance that are not explicitly required by law. l Streamline the process for state and local governments to demonstrate that their federally funded highway projects will not interfere with NAAQS attainment. l Adopt policies to prevent abuse of EPA’s CAA “error correction” authority.20 EPA historically has used this to coerce states into adopting its favored policies on pain of imposition of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). l Limit EPA’s reliance on CAA § 30121 general rulemaking authority to ensure that it is not abused to issue regulations for which EPA lacks substantive authority elsewhere in the statute. l If possible, return the standard-setting role to Congress. Climate Change l Remove the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) for any source category that is not currently being regulated. The overall reporting program imposes significant burdens on small businesses and companies that are not being regulated. This is either a pointless burden or a sword-of- Damocles threat of future regulation, neither of which is appropriate. l Establish a system, with an appropriate deadline, to update the 2009 endangerment finding. l Establish a significant emissions rate (SER) for greenhouse gasses (GHGs). Regulating Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act22 l Repeal Biden Administration implementing regulations for the AIM Act that are unnecessarily stringent and costly. l Refrain from granting petitions from opportunistic manufacturers to add new restrictions that further skew the market toward costlier refrigerants and equipment.
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
About These Correlations
Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.