QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence

Maple industry gets formal say in federal research priorities

S. 56 — SAP Act · Filed by Peter Welch (D-VT) · 2 cosponsors · Introduced Jan 9, 2025 · Referred to committee

85%
Transparency
Typical bill: 82%
15/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
Agricultural Program Extension with…

Your members of Congress

Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.

Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.

What it does

This bill amends the Agricultural Act of 2014 to expand the Acer (maple) access and development program by requiring the Secretary of Agriculture to consult with maple industry stakeholders about research priorities before issuing grant applications, and by extending the program's authorization from 2023 to 2030. The changes benefit maple producers and researchers by giving the industry a voice in setting research priorities and ensuring the program continues.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is to extend an existing maple research program and add a stakeholder-consultation mechanism. It is a routine agricultural authorization extension with an industry-input provision, not a major policy shift or carve-out.

What the text implies

  • The consultation requirement gives organized maple industry groups a formal voice in setting federal research priorities, potentially steering public research dollars toward industry-preferred topics over broader agricultural or public-health research needs.
  • The 7-year extension (2023→2030) locks in program funding without requiring periodic reauthorization, reducing congressional oversight of the program's effectiveness or alignment with national agricultural priorities.
  • The bill does not specify how the Secretary weighs industry input against other research priorities, creating discretion that could favor industry preferences if the Secretary is receptive.

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

Who it affects

The bill extends a research program that may benefit maple farmers and rural communities, but the primary mechanism—requiring the Secretary to consult with and consider industry input on research priorities—creates a structural advantage for organized maple producers in shaping federal research spending. The public benefit (continued research funding) is real but modest; the private benefit (industry capture of research agenda) is concrete.

Who stands to gain

  • maple syrup producers and processors
  • agricultural research institutions receiving maple-focused grants

Named in the bill

Secretary of Agriculture, Agricultural Act of 2014, Section 12306, maple industry stakeholders

Where it stands

2 cosponsors: 1 Independents, 1 Republicans.

  • Jan 9, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
  • Jan 9, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry”

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

How this was measured

Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (962 characters) on Sep 23, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 14,707 analysed bills.

Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.

As of — page rendered 2026-09-23.

“Maple industry gets formal say in federal research priorities” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/s56 Report an error

Correlative observation from public records — not evidence of coordination or wrongdoing, and not financial advice.
This page is the record as of today. The app tells you when it changes.
Quorum analysis of the full bill text · 119th Congress · public record