The bill
RED Tape Act
HR. 6398, 119th Congress — read as touching Oil & Gas.
Sponsored by
Rep. Joyce, John [R-PA-13]
ID: J000302
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 6398, 119th Congress — read as touching Oil & Gas.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Environmental Protection Agency" section, p. 458-460 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.
April 16, 2026
📍 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 intellectually bankrupt inhabitants of Congress. The "RED Tape Act" - because who doesn't love a good acronym? It's like they're trying to win a prize for most creative way to disguise a blatant attempt to gut environmental regulations.
Let's dissect this mess, shall we? The bill amends the Clean Air Act, specifically Section 309, which deals with review by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of proposed legislation. But don't worry, it's not like they're trying to weaken the EPA's oversight or anything... oh wait, that's exactly what they're doing.
The changes are subtle, but devastating. They remove language requiring the EPA to comment on proposed federal projects and regulations, effectively neutering their ability to review and critique these proposals. It's like removing the warning labels from a pack of cigarettes - sure, it might make them look prettier, but it doesn't change the fact that they're still toxic.
The affected industries? Oh, just the usual suspects: fossil fuel companies, polluters, and other eco-villains who can't be bothered with pesky regulations. They'll be thrilled to know that their profits will no longer be hindered by trivial concerns like public health and environmental protection.
Compliance requirements? Ha! Who needs those when you've got lobbyists whispering sweet nothings in politicians' ears? The timelines for implementation are conveniently vague, allowing industries to drag their feet while the EPA is left to twiddle its thumbs.
Enforcement mechanisms? Don't make me laugh. The penalties will be so toothless, they might as well be written on a Post-It note. It's like trying to punish a toddler with a time-out - they'll just smile and continue throwing tantrums until they get their way.
The economic and operational impacts? Well, let's just say that the only thing that'll be "reduced" is the life expectancy of anyone living near a polluted area. The operational impact will be a surge in profits for industries that don't have to bother with those pesky regulations. It's a win-win... for them.
In conclusion, the "RED Tape Act" is a masterclass in legislative malpractice. It's a symptom of a deeper disease: corruption, greed, and a complete disregard for human life. The diagnosis? Terminal stupidity, with a side of malignant narcissism. Prognosis? We're all doomed.
Rep. Joyce, John [R-PA-13]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No organization contributions found
No committee contributions found
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 51 nodes and 53 connections
Total contributions: $53
Showing top 16 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 harmed.
Section 2 of the bill amends the Clean Air Act, which could lead to stricter regulations on oil and gas companies, thereby imposing a cost on them.
The bill's focus on environmental regulation, as seen in Section 2's amendment to the Clean Air Act, could lead to increased regulatory burdens on electric utilities, potentially increasing their costs.
The potential for stricter environmental regulations due to the bill's amendments could affect companies involved in energy infrastructure, such as pipelines and storage facilities, by increasing their regulatory compliance costs.
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.
AI Analysis:
"The RED Tape Act aligns strongly with Project 2025's goal of streamlining EPA review processes and reducing regulatory burdens by removing EPA's requirement to comment on federal projects and regulations, directly supporting efforts to limit EPA overreach and improve efficiency in environmental permitting."
— 425 — Environmental Protection Agency are statutorily required, and remove any regulatory differences between attainment and maintenance that are not explicitly required by law. l Streamline the process for state and local governments to demonstrate that their federally funded highway projects will not interfere with NAAQS attainment. l Adopt policies to prevent abuse of EPA’s CAA “error correction” authority.20 EPA historically has used this to coerce states into adopting its favored policies on pain of imposition of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). l Limit EPA’s reliance on CAA § 30121 general rulemaking authority to ensure that it is not abused to issue regulations for which EPA lacks substantive authority elsewhere in the statute. l If possible, return the standard-setting role to Congress. Climate Change l Remove the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) for any source category that is not currently being regulated. The overall reporting program imposes significant burdens on small businesses and companies that are not being regulated. This is either a pointless burden or a sword-of- Damocles threat of future regulation, neither of which is appropriate. l Establish a system, with an appropriate deadline, to update the 2009 endangerment finding. l Establish a significant emissions rate (SER) for greenhouse gasses (GHGs). Regulating Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act22 l Repeal Biden Administration implementing regulations for the AIM Act that are unnecessarily stringent and costly. l Refrain from granting petitions from opportunistic manufacturers to add new restrictions that further skew the market toward costlier refrigerants and equipment. — 426 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Conduct realistic cost assessments that reflect actual consumer experiences instead of the current unrealistic ones claiming that the program is virtually cost-free. Mobile Source Regulation by the Office of Transportation and Air Quality l Establish GHG car standards under Department of Transportation (DOT) leadership that properly consider cost, choice, safety, and national security. l Review the existing “ramp rate” for car standards to ensure that it is actually achievable. l Include life cycle emissions of electric vehicles and consider all of their environmental impacts. l Restore the position that California’s waiver applies only to California- specific issues like ground-level ozone, not global climate issues. l Ensure that other states can adopt California’s standards only for traditional/criteria pollutants, not greenhouse gases. l Stop the use of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to increase standards on airplanes. l Reconsider the Cleaner Trucks Initiative to balance the goal of driving down emissions without creating significant costs or complex burdens on the industry. Air Permitting Reforms for New Source Review (Pre-Construction Per- mits) and Title V (Operating Permits) l Develop reforms to ensure that when a facility improves efficiency within its production process, new permitting requirements are not triggered. l Restore the Trump EPA position on Once-In, Always-In (that major sources can convert to area sources when affiliated emissions standards are met). l Revisit permitting and enforcement assumptions that sources will operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year; this artificially inflates a source’s potential to emit (PTE), which can result in more stringent permit terms.
AI Analysis:
"The RED Tape Act aligns closely with Project 2025's goal of streamlining EPA review processes and reducing regulatory burdens, particularly by limiting EPA's commenting authority on federal projects and regulations, which mirrors efforts to curb perceived overreach and improve efficiency in environmental oversight."
— 425 — Environmental Protection Agency are statutorily required, and remove any regulatory differences between attainment and maintenance that are not explicitly required by law. l Streamline the process for state and local governments to demonstrate that their federally funded highway projects will not interfere with NAAQS attainment. l Adopt policies to prevent abuse of EPA’s CAA “error correction” authority.20 EPA historically has used this to coerce states into adopting its favored policies on pain of imposition of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). l Limit EPA’s reliance on CAA § 30121 general rulemaking authority to ensure that it is not abused to issue regulations for which EPA lacks substantive authority elsewhere in the statute. l If possible, return the standard-setting role to Congress. Climate Change l Remove the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) for any source category that is not currently being regulated. The overall reporting program imposes significant burdens on small businesses and companies that are not being regulated. This is either a pointless burden or a sword-of- Damocles threat of future regulation, neither of which is appropriate. l Establish a system, with an appropriate deadline, to update the 2009 endangerment finding. l Establish a significant emissions rate (SER) for greenhouse gasses (GHGs). Regulating Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act22 l Repeal Biden Administration implementing regulations for the AIM Act that are unnecessarily stringent and costly. l Refrain from granting petitions from opportunistic manufacturers to add new restrictions that further skew the market toward costlier refrigerants and equipment.
AI Analysis:
"The RED Tape Act’s streamlining of EPA review processes directly supports Project 2025’s goal of reforming EPA regulatory review to reduce burdens, ensure transparent cost‑benefit analysis, and limit duplicative or third‑party enforcement mechanisms."
— 423 — Environmental Protection Agency regulatory review (before options are selected); causality of health effects; low-dose risk estimation (linear no-threshold analysis); and employment loss analysis. Personnel The majority of the political appointee team must be assembled, vetted, and ready to deploy before Day One. To the extent provided by the Federal Vacan- cies Reform Act,15 appointees in consideration for Senate-confirmed positions (excluding the Administrator) should be prepared to serve as a Deputy or Principal Deputy to get into the agency on Day One while their nomination and affiliated confirmation processes proceeds. In addition to a deputy slated for the Assistant Administrator role, each office will need a political chief of staff, senior advisers designated to run suboffices, and energized assistants. Teams should be balanced with technical knowledge, legal expertise, and political exposure. Ideally, they should also be geographically diverse. Appointee positions should also extend to all the regional offices and specialty labs. OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION (OAR) OAR develops national programs, policies, and regulations to control air pollution and radiation exposure. In recent decades, OAR and its statutory respon- sibilities under the Clean Air Act have been reimagined in an attempt to expand the reach of the federal government. The U.S. Supreme Court has stopped and stricken several actions from OAR under liberal Administrations, citing a lack of requisite legal support. A reformed OAR should focus on EPA’s mission of limiting and minimizing criteria and hazardous air pollutants in partnership with the states. Cross-Cutting Reforms. OAR consists of four suboffices with two located in Washington, D.C.; one in Ann Arbor, Michigan; and one at Research Triangle Park in Raleigh, North Carolina. The following reforms should be implemented across all OAR offices: l Issue a rule to ensure consistent and transparent consideration of costs. l When doing cost-benefit analysis, use appropriate discount rates, focus on the benefits of reducing the pollutant targeted by Congress, identify “co-benefits” separately, and acknowledge the uncertainties involved in quantifying benefits. l Review and revise Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) cost guidance to ensure that calculations are accurate and reflect the actual regulatory burden, including costs of air rules implementation and compliance. — 424 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Obey Congress’s direction in CAA § 32116 to “conduct continuing evaluations” of the employment and plant-closure effects of air regulations. l Ensure that all provisions of CAA § 307(d)17 are observed. Congress placed special constraints on air rules, and that intent should be respected. l To the extent that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)18 remains in place, ensure to the maximum extent possible that grants and funding are provided to state regulatory entities and not to nonprofits. l Remove any regulations or requirements that confer on third parties any authorities that have been provided to EPA, such as the oil and gas supplemental, which created a Super-Emitter Response Program that allows third parties to act as EPA enforcers. Policy-Specific Actions National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) l EPA adopted by regulation a goal of restoring natural visibility by 2064. The statute does not require this, and EPA should consider whether a longer timeline is less disruptive or more realistic. Regional haze rules should be revised to prevent subsequent “planning periods” from being abused to compel the shutdown of disfavored facilities. l Under the Good Neighbor Program/Interstate pollutant transport program, review Biden-era regulations to ensure that they do not “overcontrol” upwind states in violation of the statute as construed by the U.S. Supreme Court. Reverse the program’s 2022 expansion beyond power plants. l Putting guardrails on downwind states is an abuse of the CAA § 126(b)19 petition process. EPA must ensure, in keeping with statutory text, that petitions identify a reasonably discrete “group” of upwind sources alleged to violate the good neighbor provision. l Ensure that the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) considers all of the statutorily charged factors (for example, social and economic effects resulting from NAAQS attainment and maintenance strategies). l Ensure that the requirements EPA puts on a state that has achieved attainment status from nonattainment status are limited to those that
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
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.
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".