Congress strips marine sanctuaries of cable oversight power

What it does

This bill amends the National Marine Sanctuaries Act to prevent the Secretary of Commerce from blocking or requiring permits for undersea fiber optic cable installation, operation, and maintenance in marine sanctuaries if a federal or state agency has already authorized the activity. It removes the Secretary's independent authority to impose additional restrictions on cables that have received upstream federal or state approval.

Why we flagged it

The bill's operative effect is to strip the Secretary of Commerce of independent authority to impose environmental conditions on undersea cable projects in marine sanctuaries. It is functionally a deregulation measure that privileges telecom/broadband infrastructure over sanctuary-level environmental review, even though the title frames it as 'protection.'

What the text implies

• The bill's title ('Undersea Cable Protection Act') suggests it protects cables, but the operative mechanism removes protections FROM marine sanctuaries. The framing inverts the actual effect: it protects cable operators from sanctuary-level environmental review, not cables from harm.
• Section 310A(b) preserves 'interagency cooperation' requirements under section 304(d), but does not define what those requirements are or whether they provide meaningful environmental review. If section 304(d) is purely procedural (notice, consultation) rather than substantive (environmental impact assessment, mitigation), the preservation is hollow.
• The bill applies to cables 'authorized by a Federal or State agency' — a broad category that may include permits issued under minimal environmental scrutiny. A state agency permit for a cable route may not reflect the same environmental standards as a sanctuary permit would require.
• Removal of the Secretary's ability to require 'special use permits' eliminates a tool for imposing conditions (e.g., seasonal restrictions, monitoring, mitigation) tailored to sanctuary-specific ecosystems. Cables become subject only to the original authorizing agency's conditions, which may not account for sanctuary values.
• The bill does not distinguish between new cables and repair/recovery of existing cables. Repair and recovery operations may disturb seafloor habitat; subordinating these to prior federal/state authorization removes sanctuary-level oversight of ongoing disturbance.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Ordinary citizens lose independent environmental review and protection at the sanctuary level. Marine sanctuaries exist to protect ecosystems; this bill subordinates that protection to upstream federal/state decisions, removing a layer of scrutiny. Citizens who depend on marine ecosystem health, fisheries, and coastal resilience bear the cost of reduced oversight.

Who stands to gain

• telecommunications companies and broadband infrastructure operators
• submarine cable manufacturers and installation contractors
• internet service providers and data center operators

Named in the bill

Secretary of Commerce, National Marine Sanctuaries Act, Federal agencies, State agencies, undersea fiber optic cable operators, marine sanctuaries

Where it stands

7 cosponsors: 7 Republicans.

• Jan 9, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Jan 9, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Natural Resources and Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources”
• Jan 23, 2025 — Hearing held · Congress.gov: “Subcommittee Hearings Held”
• Jun 25, 2025 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
• Jun 25, 2025 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 25 - 18”
• Feb 11, 2026 — Passed the House · Congress.gov: “On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 218 - 212 (Roll no. 67).”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

6 lobbying clients named this bill on 7 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $27,101,600 in lobbying spend. A filing names 28 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 82% of bills with at least one filing.

Buddy Carter, the sponsor, reported $988,325 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A. — $17,960,000 on 1 filing
• Meta Platforms, Inc. and Various Subsidiaries — $5,990,000 on 1 filing
• Microsoft Corporation — $2,690,000 on 1 filing
• Earthjustice Action — $376,600 on 2 filings
• Nec Corporation of America — $85,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.