Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to permanently prohibit issuance of leases or authorizations for exploration, development, or production of oil and natural gas on the outer Continental Shelf planning areas off Washington, Oregon, and California (four planning areas identified in BOEM's 2024–2029 program). The prohibition is absolute and applies notwithstanding other law.
Environmental protection versus energy security and jobs
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill presents a clear and narrowly framed substantive change by adding an express statutory prohibition on oil and gas leases and authorizations in four named West Coast planning areas.
Amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to permanently prohibit issuance of leases or authorizations for exploration, development, or production of oil and natural gas on the outer Continental Shelf planning areas off Washington, Oregon, and California (four planning areas identified in BOEM's 2024–2029 program).
The prohibition is absolute and applies notwithstanding other law.
Clear policy change favored by coastal/environmental advocates but lacking compromise features and likely opposed by energy stakeholders, making enactment unlikely absent tradeoffs.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill presents a clear and narrowly framed substantive change by adding an express statutory prohibition on oil and gas leases and authorizations in four named West Coast planning areas. The primary legal mechanism is specific and directly incorporated into the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.
Environmental protection versus energy security and jobs
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Environmental protection versus energy security and jobs
Likely strongly supportive as a permanent coastal and climate protection measure.
Views the ban as preventing offshore drilling risks and aligning federal policy with West Coast climate goals, while expecting complementary clean energy and worker transition policies.
Likely cautiously favorable but pragmatic; supports coastal protection while wanting to manage energy security, economic, and legal risks.
Would seek data, transition assistance, and contingency measures to reduce unintended costs.
Likely opposed as an overbroad federal restriction that limits domestic energy production and economic activity.
Views the permanent ban as federal overreach that could raise costs and set adverse precedent.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Clear policy change favored by coastal/environmental advocates but lacking compromise features and likely opposed by energy stakeholders, making enactment unlikely absent tradeoffs.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Environmental protection versus energy security and jobs
Clear policy change favored by coastal/environmental advocates but lacking compromise features and likely opposed by energy stakeholders, m…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill presents a clear and narrowly framed substantive change by adding an express statutory prohibition on oil and gas leases and authorizations in four named West Coast p…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.