Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
The bill adds a new subsection to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act that bars the Secretary from issuing any oil or natural gas lease for exploration, development, or production on the Outer Continental Shelf off the coasts of Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut. The prohibition applies notwithstanding any other law.
Climate and coastal protection vs. domestic energy development and jobs
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill provides a concise and legally clear amendment to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act that would bar future oil and gas leasing off the coasts of five New England states.
The bill adds a new subsection to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act that bars the Secretary from issuing any oil or natural gas lease for exploration, development, or production on the Outer Continental Shelf off the coasts of Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut.
The prohibition applies notwithstanding any other law.
It does not amend other statutes or create accompanying programs in the bill text.
Narrow and administratively clear but politically sensitive; requires supermajority in Senate or inclusion in larger package.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill provides a concise and legally clear amendment to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act that would bar future oil and gas leasing off the coasts of five New England states. The statutory mechanism is specific and direct, but the bill omits fiscal acknowledgement, transitional treatment for existing authorizations, and oversight or enforcement detail.
Climate and coastal protection vs. domestic energy development and jobs
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Climate and coastal protection vs. domestic energy development and jobs
Likely strongly supportive.
The ban directly protects coastal ecosystems and reduces potential new domestic fossil fuel extraction near densely populated New England coasts.
Supporters would view it as aligned with climate goals and local economic protection for fisheries and tourism.
Cautiously supportive but pragmatic.
The centrists see clear local benefits protecting coasts, yet worries about energy security, economic tradeoffs, and lack of accompanying mitigation measures.
Would favor offsets like transition assistance or formal study of impacts.
Likely opposed.
The prohibition is viewed as federal overreach that restricts resource development, surrenders potential revenue and jobs, and may raise energy costs or import dependence.
Concerns include precedent and limiting executive flexibility.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow and administratively clear but politically sensitive; requires supermajority in Senate or inclusion in larger package.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Climate and coastal protection vs. domestic energy development and jobs
Narrow and administratively clear but politically sensitive; requires supermajority in Senate or inclusion in larger package.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill provides a concise and legally clear amendment to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act that would bar future oil and gas leasing off the coasts of five New England s…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.