H.R. 3922

H.R. 3922: Cross-Boundary Wildfire Solutions Act

Passed House Joe Neguse (D) HOUSE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

The Cross-Boundary Wildfire Solutions Act requires the Government Accountability Office to examine how to improve wildfire prevention efforts that involve multiple landowners, including federal agencies and state, local, and tribal governments. The goal is to make it easier for these different entities to work together on wildfire mitigation strategies.

Positive Media Summary

Media coverage has highlighted the importance of collaborative efforts in wildfire management, praising the bill for its focus on cross-boundary solutions that could lead to more effective wildfire prevention and response. Supporters emphasize that this approach could enhance coordination among various land management authorities, potentially reducing the risk and impact of wildfires.

Negative Media Summary

Critics have raised concerns that the bill may not provide sufficient funding or resources to implement the recommended strategies, questioning whether a study alone will lead to meaningful action. Some commentators argue that without concrete legislative measures or incentives for cooperation, the bill may fall short of addressing the urgent challenges posed by wildfires.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
2/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$0
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Public Lands and Natural Resources

The analysis of H.R. 3922, the Cross-Boundary Wildfire Solutions Act, indicates a low risk of conflicts of interest for sponsor Joe Neguse. There are no direct industry overlaps between the bill's subject matter and the top donor industries associated with Neguse. The lobbying activity in this policy area includes several undisclosed amounts from various entities, but the most significant disclosed amount is $600,000 from the National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc. This amount does not directly correlate with wildfire solutions, suggesting that while there is lobbying activity, it does not present a clear conflict with the bill's objectives. Voters should be aware that while there is substantial lobbying, the lack of direct financial ties to the bill's subject matter minimizes potential conflicts.

Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, INC. NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, INC. $600,000
BSA, THE SOFTWARE ALLIANCE TIM YEHL, LLC $20,000
ENVISION GROUP LLC MR. ANDREW FUTEY undisclosed
GESCONTI GROUP,INC. GESCONTI GROUP,INC. undisclosed
JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS CORPORATION JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS CORPORATION undisclosed
KASICH COMPANY MARKQUEST undisclosed
MARKQUEST MARKQUEST undisclosed
AMERICAN FINANCIAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION MARKQUEST undisclosed
KASICH COMPANY MARKQUEST undisclosed
AMERICAN LOGISTICS ASSOCIATION MARKQUEST undisclosed
MARKQUEST MARKQUEST undisclosed
TRACKONOMY SYSTEMS, INC. ANCHOR & ARROW LLC undisclosed
HOLLY STRATEGIES INC. ON BEHALF OF 202 GROUP ANCHOR & ARROW LLC undisclosed
CITY OF ST LOUIS BRACY TUCKER BROWN & VALANZANO DBA BROWN & ASSOCIATES undisclosed
EMAD EL SAID YOUSSEF SAAD EL-GALADA THROUGH BOLT CAPITAL, LP NEXUSONE CONSULTING undisclosed

Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us