Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
This bill prohibits appointing, or allowing to serve in an acting capacity, anyone who in the prior 10 years was an executive officer of a fossil fuel extraction/production company, a fossil fuel trade association executive, or a registered fossil fuel lobbyist, to a specified list of senior White House and agency positions. It defines covered department heads and political appointees, fossil fuel entities, lobbyists, and executive officer roles, and exempts employees whose work principally concerns renewable energy.
Value of industry experience versus risk of regulatory capture.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill articulates a specific substantive restriction with well-defined covered positions and terms, but it is underdeveloped on implementation, enforcement, fiscal considerations, and integration with existing appointment authorities.
This bill prohibits appointing, or allowing to serve in an acting capacity, anyone who in the prior 10 years was an executive officer of a fossil fuel extraction/production company, a fossil fuel trade association executive, or a registered fossil fuel lobbyist, to a specified list of senior White House and agency positions.
It defines covered department heads and political appointees, fossil fuel entities, lobbyists, and executive officer roles, and exempts employees whose work principally concerns renewable energy.
Narrow administrative form but high political salience and partisan stakes make enactment unlikely without cross-aisle compromise or major changes.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill articulates a specific substantive restriction with well-defined covered positions and terms, but it is underdeveloped on implementation, enforcement, fiscal considerations, and integration with existing appointment authorities.
Value of industry experience versus risk of regulatory capture.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Value of industry experience versus risk of regulatory capture.
Likely strongly supportive: treats fossil-fuel industry influence as a core barrier to climate policy and regulatory integrity.
Views the 10-year ban as a necessary firewall against capture and delaying tactics.
Cautiously supportive but pragmatic: values conflict-of-interest controls and trust, yet worries about excluding qualified candidates and legal defensibility.
Prefers narrowly tailored rules and clear definitions.
Likely opposed: views the ban as an ideologically driven exclusion that disqualifies industry expertise and expands politicized personnel rules.
Sees possible constitutional or statutory problems.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow administrative form but high political salience and partisan stakes make enactment unlikely without cross-aisle compromise or major changes.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Value of industry experience versus risk of regulatory capture.
Narrow administrative form but high political salience and partisan stakes make enactment unlikely without cross-aisle compromise or major…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill articulates a specific substantive restriction with well-defined covered positions and terms, but it is underdeveloped on implementation, enforcement, fiscal consider…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.