To amend the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands to make that Act applicable to hardrock minerals.

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/3872
Last Updated: September 7, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Fallon, Pat [R-TX-4]

ID: F000246

Follow the money

The bill

To amend the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands to make that Act applicable to hardrock minerals.

HR. 3872, 119th Congress — read as touching Coal Mining.

The sponsor

Rep. Fallon, Pat [R-TX-4]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$115,839 raised

22 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

95% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of the Interior" section, p. 554-556 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.

June 9, 2026

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

📍 Current Status

Next: The full House will vote on whether to pass the bill.

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, brought to you by the same geniuses who think a "MERICA Act" is a clever name. Let me put on my surgical gloves and dissect this monstrosity.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The MERICA Act's stated purpose is to amend the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands to include hardrock minerals. Wow, what a thrilling goal. I'm sure it has nothing to do with lining the pockets of mining corporations or enriching politicians who'll be receiving "donations" from said corporations.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill redefines terms like "acquired lands," "Secretary," and "mineral leasing laws." Oh, and it adds a new definition for "hardrock mineral," because apparently, that wasn't clear enough before. The changes are so earth-shattering that I'm surprised the authors didn't include a provision to rename the bill after themselves.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** Mining corporations will be thrilled to know they can now lease hardrock minerals on acquired lands. Environmental groups might be less enthusiastic, but who cares about them? They're just tree-hugging hippies who don't understand the importance of "progress." Native American tribes, whose ancestral lands are often targeted for mining, will likely be ignored or placated with token gestures.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of "regulatory capture," where industry lobbyists write legislation that benefits their clients at the expense of everyone else. Expect increased environmental degradation, displacement of indigenous communities, and a further concentration of wealth among mining corporations. But hey, who needs clean air and water when you can have more gold and copper?

Diagnosis: This bill is suffering from a severe case of "Corporate-itis," a disease characterized by an excessive influence of special interests on legislation. Symptoms include a complete disregard for environmental and social consequences, as well as a blatant attempt to enrich the already wealthy.

Treatment: None needed. The patient (the MERICA Act) will likely be passed with minimal scrutiny, and its symptoms will only worsen over time. After all, who needs accountability when you have campaign contributions and lobbying dollars?

Related Topics

Public Lands & Natural Resources
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Fallon, Pat [R-TX-4]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$115,839
18 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$4,700
Committees
$0
Individuals
$111,139

No PAC contributions found

1
DODD CG LLC
1 transaction
$3,000
2
NORTH TEXAS RHEUMATOLOGY PA
1 transaction
$1,700

No committee contributions found

1
PARTEE, SUE
2 transactions
$41,514
2
PENZ, WILLIAM
1 transaction
$10,000
3
FISHER, KENNETH
2 transactions
$6,600
4
FISHER, SHERRILYN
2 transactions
$6,600
5
FRITCHER, SAM
2 transactions
$6,600
6
GLENDENNING, REX
1 transaction
$5,000
7
PHILLIPS, BRADFORD
1 transaction
$5,000
8
SNYDER, RICK
1 transaction
$3,425
9
ADAMS, CAROL
1 transaction
$3,300
10
GOTT, JANET
1 transaction
$3,300
11
INMAN, GINO
1 transaction
$3,300
12
INMAN, DARLA
1 transaction
$3,300
13
PATTERSON, DAN
1 transaction
$3,300
14
STEIN, SHELDON
1 transaction
$3,300
15
FRITCHER, ELAINE
1 transaction
$3,300
16
HUBBARD, SONJA
1 transaction
$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 2 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Moran, Nathaniel [R-TX-1]

ID: M001224

Top Contributors

20

1
PELTIER, PATRICK
PELTIER AUTO GROUP • VICE PRESIDENT
IndividualTYLER, TX
$9,900
Jan 31, 2024
2
PELTIER, PATRICK
IndividualTYLER, TX
$6,600
Feb 22, 2024
3
MARSHALL, MATTHEW
DRAKE • REAL ESTATE
IndividualTYLER, TX
$6,600
Aug 22, 2024
4
MARSHALL, MATTHEW
DRAKE • REAL ESTATE
IndividualTYLER, TX
$6,600
Aug 22, 2024
5
ANDERSON, RICHARD M.
PAFFORD EMS • 911 PROFESSIONAL
IndividualMARSHALL, TX
$5,000
Apr 15, 2024
6
LEATHERWOOD, HARRY
SELF • SELF
IndividualTYLER, TX
$5,000
Sep 23, 2024
7
STOVALL, SCOTT
IndividualTROUP, TX
$3,300
Jan 18, 2024
8
PELTIER, MIKAH ANN
COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER • COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER
IndividualTYLER, TX
$3,300
Jan 31, 2024
9
PELTIER, PATRICK
PELTIER AUTO GROUP • VICE PRESIDENT
IndividualTYLER, TX
$3,300
Jan 31, 2024
10
STEVENSON, DAVID L
CUSTOM COMMODITIES TRANSPORT • OWNER
IndividualDIANA, TX
$3,300
Feb 1, 2024

Rep. Harrigan, Pat [R-NC-10]

ID: H001101

Top Contributors

20

1
STARNES, BRYAN
ALG SENIOR LLC • CFO
IndividualGRANITE FALLS, NC
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
2
ATALA, KATHERINE DAWSON
WAKE FOREST UNIV SCHOOL OF MED • PHYSICIAN
IndividualWINSTON SALEM, NC
$3,300
Oct 21, 2024
3
SMITH, HARRY
RISE CAPITAL • FOUNDER
IndividualATLANTIC BEACH, NC
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024
4
CHEROKEE INDIANS, EASTERN BAND OF
INDIAN TRIBE • INDIAN TRIBE
IndividualCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Oct 28, 2024
5
TREFZGER, CHARLIE
ALG SENIOR • CEO
IndividualGRANITE FALLS, NC, NC
$3,300
Oct 23, 2024
6
SMITH, HARRY
RISE CAPITAL • FOUNDER
IndividualATLANTIC BEACH, NC
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024
7
KELLIGREW, JIM
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualCHARLOTTE, NC
$3,300
Nov 19, 2024
8
DUNN, MELANIE
RETIRED • RETIRED
IndividualMORGANTON, NC
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024
9
WILSON, PETE
WILSON WALSH CONSULTING • ATTORNEY CONSULTANT
IndividualLOS ANGELES, CA
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024
10
SCHILBERG, BERNARD
IMC • CEO
IndividualSOUTH WINDSOR, CT
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Fallon, Pat [R-TX-4]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 37 nodes and 47 connections

Total contributions: $47

Top Donors - Rep. Fallon, Pat [R-TX-4]

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

2 Orgs16 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 4 harmed.

  • −Coal Miningconfidence 0.90

    Section 1(1)(G)(B)(i) excludes coal from the definition of 'hardrock mineral', meaning coal remains subject to separate leasing rules and does not benefit from the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands provisions now extended to hardrock minerals.

  • −Oil & Gasconfidence 0.90

    Section 1(1)(G)(B)(ii)-(iv) explicitly excludes oil, oil shale, and gas from the definition of 'hardrock mineral', so these fossil fuels are not brought under the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands, preserving their separate regulatory treatment.

  • Section 1(1)(G)(B)(v)-(vii) excludes sodium, potassium, and sulfur from 'hardrock mineral', which are key feedstocks for chemicals and plastics manufacturing; their exclusion means they remain outside the leasing framework now applied to hardrock minerals.

  • Section 1(1)(G)(B)(viii) excludes 'mineral materials subject to disposition under the Act of July 31, 1947, commonly known as the Materials Act of 1947', which includes sand, gravel, and stone used in construction; these materials are not covered by the new hardrock mineral leasing provisions.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of the Interior

Very Strong
Vector: 62%
Pages: 554-556AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The MERICA Act directly amends the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands to include hardrock minerals, thereby implementing Project 2025’s directive to strengthen and expand the Federal Solid Mineral Leasing Program (SO 3354) and advance American energy independence through increased mineral development on public lands."

Key themes:mineral leasinghardrock mineralsfederal solid mineral leasingenergy independencestreamlined permitting

— 522 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise similar agency actions made in compliance with that order.18 Meanwhile, the new Administration must immediately reinstate the following Trump DOI sec- retarial orders: l SO 3348: Concerning the Federal Coal Moratorium;19 l SO 3349: American Energy Independence;20 l SO 3350: America-First Offshore Energy Strategy;21 l SO 3351: Strengthening the Department of the Interior’s Energy Portfolio;22 l SO 3352: National Petroleum Reserve—Alaska;23 l SO 3354: Supporting and Improving the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Program and Federal Solid Mineral Leasing Program;24 l SO 3355: Streamlining National Environmental Policy Reviews and Implementation of Executive Order 13807, “Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects”;25 l SO 3358: Executive Committee for Expedited Permitting;26 l SO 3360: Rescinding Authorities Inconsistent with Secretary’s Order 3349, “American Energy Independence;”27 l SO 3380: Public Notice of the Costs Associated with Developing Department of the Interior Publications and Similar Documents;28 l SO 3385: Enforcement Priorities;29 and l SO 3389: Coordinating and Clarifying National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Reviews.30 Actions. At the same time, the new Administration must: l Reinstate quarterly onshore lease sales in all producing states according to the model of BLM’s IM 2018–034, with the slight adjustment of including expanded public notice and comment.31 The new Administration should work with Congress on legislation, such as the Lease Now Act32 and — 523 — Department of the Interior ONSHORE Act,33 to increase state participation and federal accountability for energy production on the federal estate. l Conduct offshore oil and natural gas lease sales to the maximum extent permitted under the 2023–2028 lease program,34 with the possibility to move forward under a previously studied but unselected plan alternative.35 l Develop immediately and finalize a new five-year plan, while working with Congress to reform the OCSLA by eliminating five-year plans in favor of rolling or quarterly lease sales. l Review all resource management plans finalized in the previous four years and, when necessary, select studied alternatives to restore the multi-use concept enshrined in FLPMA and to eliminate management decisions that advance the 30 by 30 agenda. l Set rents, royalty rates, and bonding requirements to no higher than what is required under the Inflation Reduction Act.36 l Comply with the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 to establish a competitive leasing and development program in the Coastal Plain, an area of Alaska that was set aside by Congress specifically for future oil and gas exploration and development. It is often referred to as the “Section 1002 Area” after the section of ANILCA that excludes the area from Arctic National Wildlife Refuge’s wilderness designation.37 l Conclude the programmatic review of the coal leasing program, and work with the congressional delegations and governors of Wyoming and Montana to restart the program immediately.38 l Abandon withdrawals of lands from leasing in the Thompson Divide of the White River National Forest, Colorado; the 10-mile buffer around Chaco Cultural Historic National Park in New Mexico (restoring the compromise forged in the Arizona Wilderness Act39); and the Boundary Waters area in northern Minnesota if those withdrawals have not been completed.40 Meanwhile, revisit associated leases and permits for energy and mineral production in these areas in consultation with state elected officials. l Require regional offices to complete right-of-way and drilling permits within the average time it takes states in the region to complete them.

Department of the Interior

Strong
Vector: 63%
Pages: 572-574AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The MERICA Act aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on expanding domestic mineral development and streamlining federal leasing programs by updating the Mineral Leasing Act to include hardrock minerals on public lands, supporting increased resource extraction and economic growth."

Key themes:mineral leasing reformdomestic resource developmentpublic lands accessstreamlined permittingeconomic growth from resource extraction

— 540 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 24. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3354: Supporting and Improving the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Program and Federal Solid Mineral Leasing Program, July 6, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/uploads/so_-_3354_signed.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 25. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3355: Streamlining National Environmental Policy Reviews and Implementation of Executive Order 13807, “Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects,” August 31, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/ files/elips/documents/3355_-_streamlining_national_environmental_policy_reviews_and_implementation_ of_executive_order_13807_establishing_discipline_and_accountability_in_the_environmental_review_ and_permitting_process_for.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 26. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3358: Executive Committee for Expedited Permitting,” October 25, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so_3358_executive_committee_for_ expedited_permitting_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 27. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3360: Rescinding Authorities Inconsistent with Secretary’s Order 3349, “American Energy Independence,” December 22, 2017, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/3360_-_rescinding_authorities_inconsistent_with_secretarys_order_3349_american_energy_ independence.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 28. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3380: Public Notice of the Costs Associated with Developing Department of the Interior Publications and Similar Documents,” March 10, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/ doi.gov/files/elips/documents/so-3398-508_0.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 29. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3385: Enforcement Priorities,” September 14, 2020, https:// www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed-so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 30. U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order 3389: Coordinating and Clarifying National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Reviews,” September 14, 2020, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/documents/signed- so-3385-enforcement-priorities.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 31. Bureau of Land Management, “Updating Oil and Gas Leasing Reform: Land Use Planning and Lease Parcel Reviews,” IM 2018–034, January 31, 2018, https://www.blm.gov/policy/im-2018-034 (accessed March 16, 2023). 32. Lease Now Act, S. 4228, 117th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2022). 33. ONSHORE Act, S. 218, 116th Cong., 2nd Sess. (2019). https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate- bill/218/text (accessed March 18, 2023). 34. Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 130 (July 8, 2022), pp. 40859–40863. 35. The Biden Administration’s 2023–2028 proposed program is fatally flawed. Katie Tubb, “Comment for the 2023–2028 National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Program,” BOEM–2022–0031, October 6, 2022, http:// thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/Regulatory_Comments/BOEM%202023-2028%20lease%20plan%20 comment%20KTubb.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 36. See Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117–169, §§ 50261–50263. 37. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, Public Law No. 115–97, § 20001, and U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3401: Comprehensive Analysis and Temporary Halt on All Activities in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Relating to the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program,” June 1, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/elips/ documents/so-3401-comprehensive-analysis-and-temporary-halt-on-all-activitives-in-the-arctic-national- wildlife-refuge-relating-to-the-coastal-plain-oil-and-gas-leasing-program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 38. In 2016, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell instituted a moratorium on new coal leases while conducting a programmatic environmental impact statement under NEPA to address concerns about competition and inconsistency with the Obama Administration’s climate policy. In 2017, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke lifted the moratorium and ended development of a programmatic environmental impact statement. In April 2021, Interior Secretary Debra Haaland rescinded Zinke’s order and initiated a new review of the coal-leasing program. See U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3338: Discretionary Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement to Modernize the Federal Coal Program,” January 15, 2016, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi. gov/files/elips/documents/archived-3338_-discretionary_programmatic_environmental_impact_statement_ to_modernize_the_federal_coal_program.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023); U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3348”; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Order No. 3398”; and Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 159 (August 20, 2021), pp. 46873–46877. — 541 — Department of the Interior 39. Katie Tubb, “No More Standoffs: Protecting Federal Employees and Ending the Culture of Anti-Government Attacks and Abuse,” testimony before the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, Committee on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, pp. 2–4, October 22, 2019, https://congress. gov/116/meeting/house/110104/witnesses/HHRG-116-II10-Wstate-TubbK-20191022.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 40. News release, “Secretary Haaland Announces Steps to Establish Protections for Culturally Significant Chaco Canyon Landscape,” U.S. Department of the Interior, November 15, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/ secretary-haaland-announces-steps-establish-protections-culturally-significant-chaco (accessed March 16, 2023); News release, “Biden–Harris Administration Proposes Protections for Thompson Divide,” U.S. Department of the Interior, October 12, 2022, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-harris-administration- proposes-protections-thompson-divide (accessed March 16, 2023); News release, “Biden Administration Takes Action to Complete Study of Boundary Waters Area Watershed,” U.S. Department of the Interior, October 20, 2021, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/biden-administration-takes-action-complete-study-boundary- waters-area-watershed (accessed March 16, 2023); and News release, “Interior Department Takes Action on Mineral Leases Improperly Renewed in the Watershed of the Boundary Waters Wilderness,” U.S. Department of the Interior, January 26, 2022, https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-department-takes-action- mineral-leases-improperly-renewed-watershed-boundary (accessed March 16, 2023). 41. Endangered Species Act, Public Law 91–135, § 4(b)(2), and Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 244 (December 18, 2020), pp. 82376–82389. 42. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Governing the Take of Migratory Birds Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.” https://www.fws.gov/regulations/mbta (accessed March 16, 2023). 43. Dino Grandoni and Anna Phillips, “Biden Restores Climate Safeguards in Key Environmental Law, Reversing Trump,” Washington Post, April 19, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate- environment/2022/04/19/biden-nepa-climate-trump/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 44. Donald Trump, “Executive Order on Creating Schedule F in the Accepted Service,” Executive Order 13957, October 21, 2020, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-creating- schedule-f-excepted-service/ (accessed March 16, 2023). 45. Kathleen Masterson, “Nevada Wild Horse Population Skyrockets To New High,” KUNR Public Radio, July 22, 2019, https://www.kunr.org/energy-and-environment/2019-07-22/nevada-wild-horse-population-skyrockets- to-new-high (accessed March 20, 2023). 46. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, “Report to Congress: An Analysis of Achieving a Sustainable Horse and Burro Program,” Fact sheet, May 8, 2020, https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/ Final%20Fact%20Sheet%20WHB%20Report%20To%20Congress.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 47. Pendley, Sagebrush Rebel, pp. 45–47. 48. James D. Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act At 35: Delivering on the Promise, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 53, Chap. 12 (2007), § 12.03(1)(a)(iv), https://www.guessrudd.com/wp-content/ uploads/sites/1600422/2020/05/The-Alaska-Native-Claims-Settlement-Act-at-35.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 49. Ibid., § 12.03(1)(a)(vii). See generally Richard S. Jones, Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (Public Law 92–203): History And Analysis Together With Subsequent Amendments, Report No. 81–127 GOV, June 1, 1981, http://www.alaskool.org/PROJECTS/ANCSA/reports/rsjones1981/ANCSA_History71.htm (accessed March 16, 2023). 50. 43 U.S. Code, Ch. 33. ANCSA also created 12 Native-owned regional corporations and authorized $962 million in “seed money.” Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act At 35, § 12.03(2)(e). 51. ANCSA provided that the withdrawal of the lands would expire in 1978 if Congress had not designated the lands as federal enclaves. John K. Norman Cole and Steven W. Silver, Alaska’s D-2 Lands, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 6B, Ch. 5, September 1978, and Raymond A. Peck, Jr., And Then There Were None: Evolving Federal Restraints on the Availability of Public Lands for Mineral Development, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 25, Ch. 3, 1979. 52. Andrus used purported authority under the FLPMA to withdraw 40 million acres, and Carter used purported authority under the Antiquities Act of to withdraw 56 million acres. James D. Linxwiler, The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act: The First Twenty Years, Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Vol. 38 Ch. 2, 1992 at 2.04(8)(c), https://ancsa.lbblawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/ANCSA-Paper-with-Table-of-Contents-1992.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023).

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Weak
Vector: 60%
Pages: 440-442AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The MERICA Act concerns hardrock mineral leasing on public lands, whereas the Project 2025 section focuses on FERC’s role in natural gas pipeline certification and LNG export facilities; both involve federal permitting and resource development but address different commodities and regulatory contexts."

Key themes:federal permittingresource developmentenergy securityeconomic growth

— 407 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions New Policies FERC should: l Recommit itself to the NGA’s purpose of providing the American people with access to affordable and reliable natural gas. l Limit its NGA decision-making on natural gas pipeline certificates to the question of whether there is a need for the natural gas. l Limit its NEPA analysis to the impacts of the actual pipeline itself, not indirect upstream and downstream effects. In addition, Congress, the states, and FERC should consider how better to pro- tect and compensate property owners whose property is taken for the benefit of the public. FERC also needs to be mindful that natural gas pipelines and projects are important for domestic access to natural gas, including local natural gas utilities, natural gas–fired electric generation, and manufacturing, as well as for exports of liquefied natural gas. FERC: LNG EXPORT FACILITIES Mission/Overview FERC permits, sites, and authorizes the construction and operation of LNG export facilities.125 It does not authorize the export of natural gas; DOE exercises that authority. LNG export facilities are important for delivering natural gas to markets around the world and have become an important policy tool in limiting the ability of Russia and Middle Eastern countries to use energy as a tool in for- eign affairs. Needed Reforms LNG exports are opposed by climate activists. In addition, some domestic man- ufacturers argue that LNG exports decrease available U.S. supplies of natural gas and increase the domestic price, thereby harming the competitive advantages of U.S. manufacturers in world markets. Currently, most LNG export facilities are along the Gulf of Mexico in Texas and Louisiana.126 Attempts to build facilities on the west coast (Jordan Cove LNG127) and the east coast have not moved forward for a variety of reasons; delays and costs of litigation can cause developers to cancel projects. An Alaska facility was approved by FERC in 2020, and the Biden Administration has indicated its sup- port.128 An east coast facility in Pennsylvania (or nearby) would unlock Marcellus shale natural gas for export.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills