Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fisheries Economics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mass. bill would require study of economic harm to commercial fishing industry
Summary
A bill filed in the Massachusetts House would direct the state labor secretary to analyze income losses suffered by commercial fishers from state and federal regulatory actions and propose changes, including to unemployment insurance, with a plan due April 1, 2026.
A bill filed in the Massachusetts House would authorize and direct the Secretary of Labor and Workforce Development to analyze economic disruption to people engaged in commercial fishing and to develop a plan to mitigate that harm, including possible changes to the state's unemployment insurance system.
Representative Kenneth P. Sweezey (R-6th Plymouth) and Representative Patrick Joseph Kearney (D-4th Plymouth) presented House Bill No. 2177, filed Jan. 10, 2025, which would require the secretary, in consultation with the Division of Marine Fisheries, to study losses that result from state and federal regulatory actions such as area closures, gear restrictions and time limitations.
The bill specifies that the secretary "shall" take into account economic hardship from seasonal closures in the commercial lobster fishery implemented to prevent harm to North Atlantic right whales, and it directs the secretary to file any plan developed under the act, together with any legislative recommendations, with the clerks of the House and Senate not later than April 1, 2026.
The measure cites both state and federal regulatory actions as potential causes of income loss and identifies modification of the state unemployment insurance system as an example of a mitigation mechanism the secretary may consider. The text instructs the secretary to consult with the Division of Marine Fisheries in preparing the analysis and plan.
House Bill No. 2177 notes similar matter filed in the previous legislative session (House No. 1850 of 2023–2024) but does not include appropriation language or specify funding for any implementation. The filing does not create a new benefit; it directs an analysis and potential legislative recommendations that would require separate legislative action to change law or funding.
Because this is a bill filing rather than an enacted statute, no votes or formal actions are recorded in the text. Next steps, if the bill advances, would include committee referral, public hearings and possible amendments before any final legislative vote.
