Lulu’s Law
Introduced March 11, 2025 · Last action April 9, 2026
Plain English Summary
This bill requires the Federal Communications Commission to add shark attacks to the list of emergency events that trigger wireless emergency alerts (the system that sends urgent messages to phones in affected areas). Currently, the FCC's alert system covers events like tornadoes, floods, and active shooters, but not shark attacks. The bill gives the FCC 180 days to issue an order making shark attacks eligible for these emergency broadcasts.
Who benefits
Coastal residents and beachgoers in shark-prone areas (particularly Florida, California, Hawaii, and other states with documented shark populations); local emergency management agencies in coastal jurisdictions; beach tourism operators and municipalities that can now alert visitors to immediate shark threats
Who pays / loses
Wireless carriers and network operators who must implement the technical capability to transmit shark attack alerts through their emergency alert systems; the FCC, which must develop the criteria and procedures for issuing such alerts; beach communities that may face increased liability and operational costs if alerts are delayed or inaccurate
Funding & Lobbying Interests
No financial interests are explicitly identified in the bill. The wireless telecommunications industry (carriers like Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile) will bear implementation costs for the alert system expansion, though these are typically minimal given existing emergency alert infrastructure. The bill does not identify lobbying support or donor backing. The bill's informal name, 'Lulu's Law,' suggests a specific incident may have motivated it, but no funding context is stated.
Political Impact
Affected Groups
Approximately 150+ million Americans living in coastal counties (per U.S. Census); beachgoers and swimmers in shark-prone states including Florida (which accounts for roughly 40% of U.S. shark incidents annually); ocean recreation workers and lifeguards; coastal property owners and tourism-dependent small businesses
Political Subtext
Proponents frame this as a reasonable public safety measure using existing technology to warn people of an immediate threat. Critics note that shark attacks are statistically rare (fewer than 45 unprovoked incidents annually in the U.S., with roughly one fatal attack per year) and may question whether the alert system should be used for low-probability events. The FCC's existing alert system is designed for imminent threats affecting large populations; shark attacks are geographically localized and unpredictable. Non-partisan public health authorities do not list shark attacks among leading causes of beach-related injury or death.
Real-World Stakes
If enacted, coastal communities will gain a rapid notification tool for confirmed shark incidents, potentially reducing swimmer injuries or fatalities in affected beaches. However, the practical impact depends on how quickly shark attacks can be verified and reported to the FCC—existing emergency alerts typically require confirmation from official sources (National Weather Service for weather, law enforcement for active threats). Shark attacks are difficult to predict or confirm in real time, meaning alerts may arrive after swimmers have already entered the water. False or overly frequent alerts could reduce public trust in the emergency alert system, as occurred in Hawaii in 2018 with the false missile warning that used similar infrastructure. No precedent exists for adding low-frequency animal incidents to the federal emergency alert system.
Sponsor
Sponsor information not available.
Vote Record
No recorded votes.
Campaign Finance — Primary Sponsor
No campaign finance data available yet.
501(c)(4) disclosure: Contributions from 501(c)(4) "dark money" organizations are not required to be publicly disclosed and are not reflected in the figures above. Data sourced from FEC public disclosure filings.
Community Discussion
Share this bill
Sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first.