"There is no appetite to overturn the (Endangered Species Act)," DeFazio said.
Federal wildlife officials said they would not comment on Tuesday's report until they have a chance to review it.
Throughout its history, the law has faced criticism from business interests, Republicans and others. They argue actions taken to shield at-risk species such as the northern spotted owl have severely hampered logging and other economic development.
Those complaints grew louder in recent months after federal wildlife officials agreed to consider protections for more than 250 additional species under settlement terms in lawsuits brought by environmental groups.
Included in the settlement was the greater sage grouse, a chicken-sized bird that has been in decline across large portions of its 11-state Western range. A final decision on whether to protect sage grouse is due next year and could result in wide-ranging restrictions on oil and gas development, agriculture and other economic activity.
The endangered act was last amended in the 1980s. Given the current level of rancor between Democrats and Republicans, academics who track the law were skeptical that the latest calls for change would succeed.
"Both sides have enough power to prevent something happening that they don't like. But nobody has enough power to pass anything," said Dale Goble, an expert on the act who works as a law professor at the University of Idaho.
Goble added that the main reason some species linger for decades on the endangered list is a shortage of federal money to help pay for their recovery.
Vanderbilt Law School professor J.B. Ruhl said previous attempts to reform the Endangered Species Act in the 1990s and again last decade failed. Regardless of the merits of the latest proposal, Ruhl said the topic remains a "third rail" many politicians are unwilling to touch.