To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish a National Resilience and Recovery Fund, and for other purposes.

Bill ID: 119/hr/5983

Last Updated: November 12, 2025

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish a National Resilience and Recovery Fund, and for other purposes.

HR. 5983, 119th Congress — read as touching Oil & Gas.

The sponsor

Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A. [D-NM-1]

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

The money

$94,500 raised

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

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Energy and Related Commissions" section, p. 440-442 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Invalid Date

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed Senate

🏛️

House 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

Summary Style:

**Bill Analysis: HR 5983 - National Resilience and Recovery Fund Act**

As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I'll dissect the intricacies of this bill, focusing on its implications for my empire's wealth, influence, and control.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of HR 5983 is to establish a National Resilience and Recovery Fund (NRRF) within the Treasury Department. This fund aims to provide financial support for various disaster relief programs, hazard mitigation initiatives, and infrastructure projects. The bill's proponents claim it will enhance national resilience and recovery capabilities.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**

1. **Establishment of NRRF:** A new trust fund is created within the Treasury Department, which will receive appropriations from various tax sources, including excise taxes on crude oil and natural gas. 2. **Taxation of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products:** The bill expands the definition of "crude oil" to include tar sands and oil shale, subjecting them to excise taxation. This change may impact my energy investments and operations. 3. **Additional Excise Tax:** A new excise tax is imposed on crude oil and imported petroleum products at a rate of 10 cents per barrel, effective January 1, 2025. This tax will likely increase costs for my companies involved in the energy sector.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. **Energy Industry:** Companies involved in crude oil production, refining, and distribution will be directly impacted by the new excise taxes. 2. **Taxpayers:** The general public may face increased fuel prices due to the additional excise tax on petroleum products. 3. **Government Agencies:** FEMA, the Department of Transportation, and other agencies responsible for disaster relief and infrastructure projects will benefit from the NRRF.

**Potential Impact & Implications:**

1. **Increased Costs:** My energy companies will likely face higher costs due to the expanded definition of "crude oil" and the additional excise tax. 2. **Reduced Profitability:** The increased taxes may reduce profit margins for my energy investments, potentially impacting our competitiveness in the market. 3. **Consolidation Opportunities:** As smaller players struggle with the new tax burden, I see opportunities for strategic acquisitions and consolidation within the industry.

In conclusion, HR 5983 presents a mixed bag of implications for my empire. While it may increase costs and reduce profitability in the short term, it also creates opportunities for consolidation and growth through strategic investments and acquisitions. As a visionary entrepreneur, I will continue to monitor this bill's progress and adapt our strategies accordingly.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A. [D-NM-1]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$94,500

21 donors

PACs

Organizations

$94,500

Committees

Individuals

No PAC contributions found

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

PUEBLO OF SANDIA

2 transactions

$6,600

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

2 transactions

$6,600

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRANTON RANCHERIA

2 transactions

$6,600

TULALIP TRIBES OF WASHINGTON

2 transactions

$6,600

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

2 transactions

$6,600

AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY

2 transactions

$5,800

MESCALERO APACHE TRIBE

2 transactions

$5,800

PUEBLO OF ISLETA

2 transactions

$5,600

PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

PUEBLO OF SANTA ANA

1 transaction

$3,300

PASCUA YAQUI TRIBE

1 transaction

$3,300

AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

1 transaction

$3,300

HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE

1 transaction

$3,300

OHKAY OWINGEH

1 transaction

$3,300

OTOE MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA

1 transaction

$3,300

PUEBLO OF LAGUNA

1 transaction

$3,300

CHEROKEE NATION

1 transaction

$3,300

SANTO DOMINGO PUEBLO

1 transaction

$3,000

TIGUA INDIAN RESERVATION

1 transaction

$2,500

TUNICA-BILOXI TRIBE OF LA

1 transaction

$2,500

No committee contributions found

No individual contributions found

Donor Network - Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A. [D-NM-1]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 67 nodes and 30 connections (87 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $94,500

Top Donors - Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A. [D-NM-1]

Showing top 21 donors by contribution amount

21 Orgs

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped, 2 harmed.

−Oil & Gasconfidence 0.95
Section 4 adds a 10 cent per barrel excise tax on crude oil and imported petroleum products to fund the National Resilience and Recovery Fund; Section 5 imposes a windfall profits tax on crude oil; Section 6 imposes a 13% severance tax on crude oil and natural gas from the outer Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico. These provisions increase costs for oil and gas producers.
−Pipelines & Energy Infrastructureconfidence 0.80
The excise taxes on crude oil and petroleum products in Sections 4-6 increase costs for midstream operators that transport oil via pipelines, vessels, railcar, or tanker truck, as these taxes apply to fuel feedstock or finished fuel products transported by such means (Section 3(b)(10)).
+Electric Utilitiesconfidence 0.70
Funds from the National Resilience and Recovery Fund (Sections 2-4) are available to the FEMA Administrator for programs including the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities grant program and the Safeguarding Tomorrow Revolving Loan Fund Program, which could support grid resilience projects benefiting electric utilities.
+Construction & Engineeringconfidence 0.70
The National Resilience and Recovery Fund finances FEMA programs such as the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities grant program, which fund infrastructure projects that construction and engineering firms would execute.

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 Energy and Related Commissions

Weak

Vector: 61%

Pages: 440-442AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on creating a disaster resilience fund financed by taxes on oil and gas, while the Project 2025 excerpt advocates for minimizing regulatory barriers to LNG exports, pipelines, and nuclear power. There is only a tangential connection through the oil and gas sector, but the bill's tax measures could conflict with Project 2025's goal of supporting domestic natural gas production."

Key themes:oil and gas industryfederal taxationenergy sector

— 408 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise FERC is considering policy statements that would consider GHG emissions as part of its NEPA review and its NGA determination as to whether approval of an LNG export facility is consistent with the public interest. New Policies Since Congress through the NGA has already determined that LNG exports to countries with free trade agreements are in the public interest,129 and because LNG exports help to ensure America’s ability to support our friends and allies around the world while also supporting domestic natural gas production, FERC: l Should not use environmental issues like climate change as a reason to stop LNG projects. l Should ensure that the natural gas pipelines that are needed deliver more of the product to market, both for domestic use and export, and are reviewed, developed and constructed in a timely manner. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Mission/Overview The Energy Reorganization Act of 1974130 created the Nuclear Regulatory Com- mission (NRC). Before then, the commercial nuclear industry was regulated by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), which was established by the 1954 Atomic Energy Act.131 Importantly, the AEC was responsible for encouraging and regulat- ing commercial nuclear power. Broad criticism of this dual function was a major factor in the establishment of the NRC, which held regulatory authority while the newly established Department of Energy held the advocacy function. Today, the NRC is responsible for a broad range of regulatory activities, including reactor safety, oversight of nuclear materials, and protection against radiation as well as permitting new reactors, certifying new reactor designs, and regulating nuclear waste management activities. Needed Reforms In 1989, the NRC established alternative licensing processes that were meant to provide a more predictable and efficient regulatory pathway for new Light Water Reactors (LWRs) by combining construction and operating nuclear power plant licenses, allowing for Early Site Permits, and establishing a framework for pre- approval of reactor designs. More recently, the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act directed the NRC to establish a technology-neutral licensing process for new, advanced reactor technologies.132 Despite these efforts, the NRC remains a significant cost and regulatory barrier to new nuclear power. Especially — 409 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions frustrating is that these costs to a large extent are due to the agencies being overly prescriptive rather than outcomes-focused and fall on well-known and understood LWR reactor technologies. New Policies While refocusing its regulatory efforts on new reactor technologies, the NRC should also continue to ensure the security of radiological sources and mitigate cybersecurity risks across the industry. Applications for Combined Operating Licenses (COLs) and design certifications that rely on light-water technology should generally be completed within two years. Early Site Permits should gener- ally be issued within one year for construction on or adjacent to an existing reactor site. Additionally, the NRC should: l Expedite the review and approval of license extensions of existing reactors, which will require the NRC to streamline and focus its NEPA review process. l Set clear radiation exposure and protection standards by eliminating ALARA (“as low as reasonably achievable”) as a regulatory principle and setting clear standards according to radiological risk and dose rather than arbitrary objectives. l Work with Congress to reform its funding approach so that licensee fees are generally required for activities that are specific to a regulated entity, with other agency costs being provided through normal appropriations. Budget In FY 2022, the NRC was required to recover approximately 85 percent of its $887.7 million budget through licensee fees.133 The Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act requires the NRC to recover nearly all of its costs through fees. These reforms would likely not cost additional money but could rebalance the fee-versus-appropriations calculation. AUTHOR’S NOTE: The preparation of this chapter was the work of many individuals. All contributors to this chapter are listed at the front of this volume, but I wish to give special thanks to Brent Bennett, Willis Bixby, Travis Fisher, Ben Lieberman, Brian McCormack, Tom Pyle, Mark Robeck, Daniel Simmons, Jack Spencer, Katie Tubb, and David Walsh. Though informed by many, the author alone assumes responsibility for the content of this chapter, and no views expressed herein should be attributed to any particular individual.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Weak

Vector: 60%

Pages: 434-436AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill creates a disaster resilience and recovery fund financed by oil taxes, which tangentially relates to infrastructure resilience but does not address the grid reliability, renewable integration, reserve margins, natural gas interdependence, or cyber/physical attack concerns central to the Project 2025 energy policy."

Key themes:disaster resilienceinfrastructure fundingenergy taxation

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Weak

Vector: 60%

Pages: 398-400AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill establishes a disaster resilience fund funded by taxes on oil and gas, which conflicts with Project 2025's goal to stop the 'war on oil and natural gas' and unleash private-sector energy innovation by ending government interference. While both address energy infrastructure, the bill's approach increases costs on fossil fuels, opposing Project 2025's pro-oil and gas stance."

Key themes:energy infrastructureoil and gas taxationfederal funding mechanisms

— 365 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Support repeal of massive spending bills like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)3 and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA),4 which established new programs and are providing hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to renewable energy developers, their investors, and special interests, and support the rescinding of all funds not already spent by these programs. l Unleash private-sector energy innovation by ending government interference in energy decisions. l Stop the war on oil and natural gas. l Allow individuals, families, and business to use the energy resources they want to use and that will best serve their needs. l Secure and protect energy infrastructure from cyber and physical attacks. l Refocus the Department of Energy on energy security, accelerated remediation, and advanced science. l Promote U.S. energy resources as a means to assist our allies and diminish our strategic adversaries. l Refocus FERC on ensuring that customers have affordable and reliable electricity, natural gas, and oil and no longer allow it to favor special interests and progressive causes. l Ensure that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission facilitates rather than hampers private-sector nuclear energy innovation and deployment. American Science Dominance. Ever since the age of Benjamin Franklin, the United States has been at the forefront of scientific discovery and technological advancement. Beginning with the groundbreaking science of the Manhattan Proj- ect, the U.S. has developed 17 National Laboratories that conduct fundamental and advanced scientific research. The National Labs have been critical in supporting national defense and ensuring that the United States leads on scientific discoveries with transformative applications that benefit America and the world. In recent years, however, U.S. science has been under threat. Externally, adversaries like the Chinese military have been engaged in scientific espionage, infiltrating taxpayer-funded scientific research projects, and funding their own science research. In addition, the National Labs have been too focused on climate change and renewable technologies.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Weak

Vector: 60%

Pages: 431-433AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on creating a disaster resilience fund financed by oil excise and windfall profits taxes, while the Project 2025 excerpt centers on nuclear waste management, OCRWM reconstitution, and NNSA nuclear deterrence priorities. There is only a tangential connection through general federal funding mechanisms and the energy sector, but no substantive overlap in objectives."

Key themes:federal funding mechanismsenergy sector taxationrevenue generation

— 398 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise violation of its contractual obligation to take the waste has resulted in the payment of “approximately $10.1 billion in settlements and judgments to contract holders.”99 l Develop new NWF funding and accounting mechanisms that allow licensed nuclear operators to guarantee resources for future nuclear waste disposal while also maintaining control of those resources. l Reconstitute OCRWM. OCRWM, as already established by statute, should be tasked with developing the next steps on Yucca Mountain and nuclear waste management. These steps should include initiating market reforms, including significant amendments to the NWPA, to allow additional industry responsibility for managing waste, market pricing and competition for waste services, and the opportunity for Nevadans to have more partnership involvement with any nuclear facility at Yucca Mountain. l Reestablish, consistent with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the position of Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. Budget Within the Office of Nuclear Energy budget, approximately $100 million is set aside for fuel cycle and waste management activities.100 These funds should be transferred to the newly established OCRWM, which should also be responsible for managing the Nuclear Waste Fund and given access to the fund as necessary to carry out its responsibilities. NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (NNSA) Mission/Overview NNSA’s primary mission is to provide and maintain a modern, safe, and effective nuclear deterrent for the United States. This includes the design and production of nuclear warheads, their integration with delivery systems, and their safe storage and decommissioning. NNSA’s responsibilities also include developing nuclear reactors for the U.S. Navy and “work[ing] to prevent nuclear weapon proliferation and reduce the threat of nuclear and radiological terrorism around the world.”101 NNSA was established by the NNSA Act, which also defines its authority.102 Needed Reforms The United States, through the NNSA, needs to make the design, development, and deployment of new nuclear warheads a top priority. Existing warheads were — 399 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions designed and built during the Cold War, and the U.S. lacks sufficient plutonium production capabilities.103 Because this process will take time, NNSA and the NNSA Labs need to ensure that existing nuclear warheads are viable and provide an appropriate strategic deterrent. New Policies The expansion of Chinese nuclear forces, the continued nuclear threat from Russia, and active nuclear programs in North Korea, Iran, and elsewhere require NNSA’s recommitment to the nuclear mission. A conservative Adminis- tration should: l Continue to develop new warheads for each branch of the triad (land, sea, and air defenses). If possible, reverse the Biden Administration’s decision to retire the B83 bomb (in order to maintain two aircraft-delivered warheads) and its decision to cancel the submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM).104 Also undertake an evaluation of the need for nuclear antisubmarine and air defense weapons in light of emerging threats. l Maintain two production sites for plutonium pits (a key element of warhead production) at Los Alamos and Savannah River.105 l Reject ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and indicate a willingness to conduct nuclear tests in response to adversary nuclear developments if necessary. This will require that NNSA be directed to move to immediate test readiness to give the Administration maximum flexibility in responding to adversary actions. l Review all new Navy, Department of Homeland Security, and U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration construction programs. The review should be conducted by the Director of Naval Reactors (DNR) with an eye to the possible inclusion of advanced affordable nuclear reactor technology and extension of DNR authority over these agencies’ nuclear construction programs. l Review the non–national security portfolios at the Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore, and Sandia labs and identify divestments to focus on nuclear deterrence. Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore, and Sandia provide unique capabilities for nuclear deterrence, and each lab maintains extensive non–national security research programs and commercial activities.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Minimal

Vector: 60%

Pages: 434-436AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on disaster resilience funding through oil and gas taxes, while the Project 2025 policy addresses electric grid reliability, reserve margins, resource diversity, and security against cyber/physical threats. There is no meaningful thematic or policy overlap between the two."

— 401 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions nation in the summer110 and winter.111 Cyber and physical attacks also threaten the grid. Specific areas for reform include the following: l Limit the impact of subsidized renewables on price formation. Subsidized renewable resources are undermining electric reliability in RTOs. The increase in subsidized, intermittent resources is undermining the ability of RTOs’ pricing models to support the reliable dispatchable generation that is needed to serve the grid at all times.112 l Reform the application of reserve margins. Reserve margins have become largely meaningless. Traditionally, the electric industry has used “reserve margins” to ensure that the grid has enough power plants to guarantee reliability. Generally, reserve margins represent the amount of generation available (power plants) to meet peak electric demand (the time of day and year when people are using the most electricity) plus a percentage of additional generation for backup.113 However, given the increasing number of intermittent resources (like solar, which may be available during the heat of the day but disappears as the sun sets), other dispatchable generation needs to be available to meet customers’ electricity requirements. Therefore, the definitions and calculations of reserve margins and peak load need to be updated to focus on the modern grid’s reliability challenges for all times of the day and year. l Recognize the interdependence of electric generation and natural gas. The interdependence of electric generation and natural gas pipelines continues to grow. Given natural gas’s important role in generating electricity, especially as backup when renewables are not available, lack of natural gas pipelines or attacks on existing pipelines could threaten our ability to generate electricity. l Expand resource diversity and reliability. Resource diversity is needed to support grid reliability. Pressure to use 100 percent renewables or non– carbon emitting resources threatens the electric grid’s reliability. A grid that has access to dispatchable resources such as coal, nuclear, and natural gas for generating power is inherently more reliable and resilient. l Protect against cyber and physical attacks. The threat of cyber and physical attacks on electric infrastructure by foreign actors like China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, as well as terrorists, continues to grow. The attacks with guns on substations in North Carolina in December 2022 that left customers without power demonstrate the grid’s vulnerability.114 — 402 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise New Policies l Reform RTOs to require reliability. FERC should direct RTOs to establish reliability pricing for eligible dispatchable generation resources or require intermittent resources to procure backup power for times when they are not available to operate. In addition, Congress should repeal subsidies for generation resources. l Update the definition and calculation of reserve margins to support reliability. FERC, NERC, and DOE should revise the definition of reserve margins to ensure the grid’s reliability throughout the day and the year. This will mean recognizing that reserve margins may need to consider “net peak” and exclude non-dispatchable resources from inclusion in reserve margin calculations. l Expand and protect natural gas infrastructure in support of electric generation. FERC needs to ensure that its consideration of natural gas pipeline applications recognizes the role that natural gas plays in electric reliability. FERC also needs to make sure that RTO pricing mechanisms support generators that need to contract for natural gas service on a firm basis. l Support resource diversity and reliability. FERC, NERC, and DOE play key roles in balancing consumer, industrial, and national defense interests to ensure an ongoing reliable, plentiful, and accessible national electricity supply. NERC reliability reviews and FERC’s reliability roles should be aware that overreliance on any one power generation fuel source entails concurrent cost and availability risk. FERC should reform market rules that unduly discriminate against dispatchable resources needed for reliability. l Strengthen security against cyber and physical threats. FERC and NERC need to enhance the security of the bulk power system by, for example, banning Chinese-made components, investing in transformers, and hardening substations and other critical infrastructure. DOE should play a leading role in identifying and addressing threats to the grid. FERC: RTOS/ISOS AND “ELECTRIC POWER MARKETS” Mission/Overview For more than 20 years, FERC has issued regulations and directed policies for the creation and operation of regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs) to manage the dispatch of generation and

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.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A.

IHS Provider Expansion Act

119/hr/3670

Albuquerque Indian School Act of 2025

119/hr/6162

Veteran Benefits Enhancement Act

119/hr/5982

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish a National Resilience and Recovery Fund, and for other purposes.