The bill
FREE Act
HR. 689, 119th Congress — read as touching Pipelines & Energy Infrastructure.
Sponsored by
Rep. Maloy, Celeste [R-UT-2]
ID: M001228
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 689, 119th Congress — read as touching Pipelines & Energy Infrastructure.
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 "Environmental Protection Agency" section, p. 458-460 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 303.
October 27, 2025
📍 Current Status
Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.
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. The FREE Act, because who doesn't love a good acronym? Let's dissect this farce.
**Diagnosis:** Regulatory Capture with symptoms of Bureaucratic Inertia and Industry Favoritism.
The bill claims to "streamline" the permitting process by introducing "permitting by rule," which is just a fancy way of saying "we'll make it easier for industries to get permits without too much oversight." The real purpose? To grease the wheels for industries that have been complaining about the tedious permitting process. It's like prescribing painkillers to a patient with a broken leg – it might feel better in the short term, but it won't fix the underlying problem.
**New Regulations:** The bill creates new guidelines for agencies to evaluate their permitting systems and consider "permitting by rule." Because, you know, agencies weren't already doing that. It's like telling a doctor to "try harder" to diagnose a patient without giving them any new tools or training.
**Affected Industries:** This bill is a wet kiss to industries that have been lobbying for easier permitting processes, such as energy, mining, and construction. They'll love the reduced oversight and faster permit approvals. The environment? Not so much.
**Compliance Requirements:** Agencies will need to submit reports on their permitting systems and identify areas where "permitting by rule" can be implemented. Because nothing says "streamlined" like more paperwork and bureaucratic busywork.
**Enforcement Mechanisms:** There are no real teeth in this bill. Agencies will still have the discretion to stall or reject permits, but now they'll have a fancy new process to justify it. The only enforcement mechanism is the requirement for agencies to submit reports, which will likely be filled with platitudes and empty promises.
**Economic and Operational Impacts:** This bill will likely lead to more permits being issued faster, which might boost economic activity in the short term. However, it also increases the risk of environmental disasters, public health crises, and other negative consequences that come with reduced oversight. It's like prescribing a medication without considering the potential side effects.
In conclusion, the FREE Act is a classic case of regulatory capture, where industries have successfully lobbied for weaker regulations to benefit their bottom line. The bill's authors are either incompetent or complicit in this farce. Either way, it's a lose-lose situation for the public and the environment.
Rep. Maloy, Celeste [R-UT-2]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: F000475
Top Contributors
10
ID: M001213
Top Contributors
10
ID: V000129
Top Contributors
10
ID: A000375
Top Contributors
10
ID: O000086
Top Contributors
10
ID: P000048
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001133
Top Contributors
10
ID: S001212
Top Contributors
10
ID: F000470
Top Contributors
10
ID: N000189
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 66 nodes and 37 connections (53 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $130,000
Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 4 helped.
Section 3(c) allows for streamlined approval process with a prompt deadline for agency action on applications, which could benefit energy infrastructure projects by reducing permitting delays and costs.
Section 3(c) provides for a more efficient permitting process, which could help oil and gas companies by reducing the time and expense associated with obtaining permits.
Section 3(c) promotes permitting by rule, which could facilitate the development of renewable energy projects by providing a more predictable and efficient permitting process.
Section 3(c) aims to reduce permitting delays and costs, which could benefit construction and engineering firms working on infrastructure projects.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Maloy, Celeste [R-UT-2])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.
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 FREE Act's focus on streamlining federal permitting systems, particularly through 'permit by rule' reforms, aligns closely with Project 2025's EPA air permitting reforms aimed at reducing regulatory burdens, preventing unnecessary permitting triggers for efficiency improvements, and modernizing New Source Review and Title V permitting processes."
— 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 FREE Act's push to streamline federal permitting and consider permit-by-rule aligns with Project 2025's air permitting reforms aimed at reducing regulatory burdens, avoiding unnecessary NSR triggers, and improving efficiency."
— 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. — 427 — Environmental Protection Agency l Defend the position that petitions to object to Title V should not be used to second-guess previous state decisions. l Clarify the relationship between New Source Review and Title V to ensure that Title V is used only as intended by Congress. CAA Section 11123 l Restore the position that EPA cannot regulate a new pollutant from an already regulated source category without making predicate findings for that new pollutant. l Institute automatic withdrawal of any proposed rule that is not finalized within the statutorily prescribed one-year period. l Revise general implementing regulations for existing source regulatory authority under CAA § 111(d)24 to ensure that EPA gives full meaning to Congress’s direction, including source-specific application, and that the state planning program is flexible, federalist, and deferential to the states. CAA Section 112 (Hazardous Air Pollutants)25 l Unregulated point or non-point source (fugitive emissions) of an already regulated hazardous air pollutant do not require a Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) standard. l Ensure that Section 112 regulations are harmonized with Section 111 regulations that apply to the same sector/sources. l Ensure that cost-benefit analysis is focused on a regulation’s targeted pollutant and separately identify ancillary or co-benefits. Radiation l Assess and update the agency’s radiation standards so that they align with those of other agencies, including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy, and Department of Transportation, as well as international standards. l Level-set past, misleading statements regarding radiological risk and reassess the Linear Non-Threshold standard.
AI Analysis:
"The FREE Act's focus on streamlining federal permitting processes aligns with Project 2025's broader goal of reducing regulatory burdens and increasing efficiency in environmental permitting, particularly for infrastructure and energy projects, though it does not specifically target EPA's CAA authorities or GHG reporting as outlined in the policy."
— 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.
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.