Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
This bill amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to prohibit the Secretary from issuing any lease for exploration, development, or production of oil or gas on the outer Continental Shelf within the Mid-Atlantic Planning Area as depicted in the 2024–2029 National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Final Program. In short, it withdraws the Mid-Atlantic outer Continental Shelf from disposition for oil and gas leasing.
Progressives emphasize climate and coastal protection benefits.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a direct and narrowly focused statutory amendment that clearly accomplishes a single policy action (withdrawal of the Mid‑Atlantic Planning Area from leasing).
This bill amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to prohibit the Secretary from issuing any lease for exploration, development, or production of oil or gas on the outer Continental Shelf within the Mid-Atlantic Planning Area as depicted in the 2024–2029 National OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Final Program.
In short, it withdraws the Mid-Atlantic outer Continental Shelf from disposition for oil and gas leasing.
Narrow and administratively clear but highly contentious on energy/climate policy, lacks compromise features, and faces high Senate procedural barriers.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a direct and narrowly focused statutory amendment that clearly accomplishes a single policy action (withdrawal of the Mid‑Atlantic Planning Area from leasing). The operative prohibition is specific and tied to an identified planning area, but the bill omits ancillary details commonly expected for a permanent statutory restriction, such as fiscal considerations, transitional rules for existing authorizations, exception clauses, and oversight provisions.
Progressives emphasize climate and coastal protection benefits.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize climate and coastal protection benefits.
Likely very supportive because the bill permanently prevents oil and gas leasing off the Mid-Atlantic coast, protecting coastal ecosystems and advancing climate goals.
Supporters would view it as precautionary and aligned with reducing fossil fuel extraction.
Cautiously favorable but pragmatic.
Appreciates coastal protection and local predictability; wants analysis of energy, legal, and economic tradeoffs.
Support would depend on offsetting measures and evidence on supply impacts.
Likely opposed.
Views the bill as unnecessary federal restriction on energy development that reduces domestic production, federal revenues, and job opportunities.
Sees it as government overreach limiting market choices.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow and administratively clear but highly contentious on energy/climate policy, lacks compromise features, and faces high Senate procedural barriers.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize climate and coastal protection benefits.
Narrow and administratively clear but highly contentious on energy/climate policy, lacks compromise features, and faces high Senate procedu…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a direct and narrowly focused statutory amendment that clearly accomplishes a single policy action (withdrawal of the Mid‑Atlantic Planning Area from leasing). The…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.