The bill
PERMIT Act
HR. 3898, 119th Congress — read as touching Agribusiness.
Sponsored by
Rep. Collins, Mike [R-GA-10]
ID: C001129
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 3898, 119th Congress — read as touching Agribusiness.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
22 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 461-463 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
December 14, 2025
📍 Current Status
Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.
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!
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. Let's dissect this monstrosity and expose its true intentions.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The PERMIT Act (HR 3898) claims to "make targeted reforms" to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, aiming to improve water quality standards, certifications, and permitting processes. Sounds noble, but don't be fooled – this bill is a Trojan horse for special interests.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**
1. **Water Quality Standards Attainability**: The bill amends Section 303(c) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to include reviews of water quality standards' cost-effectiveness and commercial availability of treatment technologies. A clever way to introduce "cost-benefit analysis" into the equation, which will inevitably lead to watering down (pun intended) environmental regulations. 2. **Water Quality Criteria Development and Transparency**: The bill adds new paragraphs to Section 304(a), requiring the Administrator to consider treatment technologies' cost and commercial availability when developing or revising water quality criteria. More "cost-benefit analysis" nonsense, designed to favor polluters over people. 3. **Improving Water Quality Certifications and American Energy Infrastructure**: This provision amends Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, making it easier for energy infrastructure projects (read: pipelines) to obtain certifications. A clear giveaway to the fossil fuel industry.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**
* Environmental groups: Will be forced to fight an uphill battle against weakened regulations and increased pollution. * Energy companies: Will rejoice at the eased permitting processes and reduced regulatory burdens. * State governments: May see some benefits from streamlined permitting, but will ultimately be beholden to federal agencies and corporate interests.
**Potential Impact & Implications:**
This bill is a classic case of "regulatory capture," where special interest groups (in this case, energy companies) have successfully lobbied for legislation that serves their interests at the expense of public health and environmental protection. The PERMIT Act will:
* Weaken water quality standards and certifications * Increase pollution from energy infrastructure projects * Favor corporate profits over public health and environmental concerns * Further erode trust in government's ability to regulate effectively
The sponsors and cosponsors of this bill should be ashamed of themselves. They're either incompetent or corrupt – take your pick.
**Diagnosis:** This bill is suffering from a severe case of "Regulatory Capture-itis," with symptoms including:
* Excessive influence from special interest groups * Weakened regulations and standards * Increased pollution and environmental degradation * Decreased public trust in government
Treatment: A healthy dose of transparency, accountability, and genuine concern for the public good. Unfortunately, this bill is beyond salvation.
**Prescription:** Vote against HR 3898 and demand better from your elected representatives.
Rep. Collins, Mike [R-GA-10]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 8 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: G000546
Top Contributors
10
ID: L000578
Top Contributors
10
ID: R000603
Top Contributors
10
ID: H001100
Top Contributors
10
ID: O000086
Top Contributors
10
ID: S001212
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001087
Top Contributors
10
ID: T000490
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 49 nodes and 37 connections (39 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $134,545
Showing top 17 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 7 helped.
Section 10 exempts agricultural stormwater discharge from permit requirements, reducing regulatory burden for agribusiness.
Section 5 improves water quality certifications for American energy infrastructure, and Section 13 includes linear pipeline projects in nationwide permits, benefiting pipelines and energy infrastructure.
Section 13 streamlines nationwide permits for linear infrastructure projects, reducing permitting uncertainty and time for construction and engineering firms.
Section 5(h)(1)(A) specifies judicial review timelines for certification actions related to transmission of electric energy, providing clarity and reducing uncertainty for electric utilities.
Section 13 includes linear pipeline projects for hydrocarbons in nationwide permits, and Section 18 supports reclamation plans for energy infrastructure, benefiting oil and gas.
Section 13 includes linear infrastructure projects for transportation of people, water, or wastewater in nationwide permits, benefiting freight rail, trucking, and logistics.
+ 1 more industry not shown.
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.
— 429 — Environmental Protection Agency As a matter of broad practice, OW should be complying with statutorily estab- lished deadlines in all situations with only minimal exceptions. In cases where statutory deadlines will not be met, senior management should be made aware of the delay and should have an opportunity to determine whether alternative courses should be taken. Depending on the outcome of regulations from the Biden Administration as well as intervention by the Supreme Court on both waters of the United States (WOTUS) and CWA Section 401,29 the repeal and reissuance of new regulations should be pursued. New Policies New regulations should include the following: l A WOTUS rule that makes clear what is and is not a “navigable water” and respects private property rights. Coordinate with Congress to develop legislation, if necessary, to codify the definition in Rapanos v. United States that “waters of the United States” can refer only to “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water…as opposed to ordinarily dry channels through which water occasionally or intermittently flows.”30 l A rule that provides clarity and regulatory certainty regarding the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process to limit unnecessary delay for needed projects, including by establishing a discharge-only approach with a limited scope (from point sources into navigable waters), assessing only water quality factors that are consistent with specific CWA sections, and excluding speculative analysis regarding future potential harm. l A rule to ensure that CWA Section 30831 has a clear and enforced time limit. l A rule to clarify the standard for criminal negligence under CWA Sections 40232 and 404.33 l A rule to prohibit retroactive or preemptive permits under CWA Section 404. l A rule to promote and shape nutrient trading that utilizes a carrot-versus- stick approach when dealing with nutrient compliance. l A rule to update compensatory mitigation that imposes no new or additional requirements beyond current law. l A rule on updates necessary for the effective use of the CWA needs survey. — 430 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l An executive order requiring EPA to find avenues and expedite the process for states obtaining primacy in available CWA and SDWA programs. This order would require coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of the Interior. l Implementation of additional policies to address challenges in water workforce, issues surrounding timely actions on primacy applications, and cybersecurity. Budget While the overall goal is certainly to reduce government spending, there is one very targeted area where increased spending would be in the nation’s interest. The Clean Water Act needs survey is the entire basis for how congressionally appro- priated funds directed to state revolving funds—standard annual appropriations that are the true underpinning of all infrastructure funding for drinking water and clean water—are distributed by EPA across the country. Because this program is currently underfunded, money is being thrown at untargeted locations while water infrastructure is crumbling at other locations. Increased targeted funding would greatly benefit water systems across the country at a time when intervention is crucial, leaving fewer communities with significant water service challenges. Personnel OW would benefit greatly from the reshifting of SES employees to different programs and from headquarters out to regional offices. OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (OLEM) OLEM’s mission is to partner with other federal agencies, states, tribes, local governments, and communities to clean up legacy pollution and revitalize land for reuse. OLEM executes this mission by protecting human health and the envi- ronment while leveraging economic opportunities and creating jobs. OLEM also oversees the agency’s emergency response. The main statutes that OLEM exe- cutes are the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)34 to regulate waste management; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)35 to clean up Superfund sites and provide resources for cleaning up brownfields sites; and Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act36 to reduce the likelihood of accidental chemical releases. Needed Reforms OLEM’s main function is to oversee the execution of cleanups under CERCLA and RCRA; therefore, it is critical that OLEM staff focus on project management more than policy creation. Emphasizing productivity more than process and policies
Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.
Tradeable Energy Performance Standards Act
Fire Safe Electrical Corridors Act of 2025
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to "Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers".