Overview
Title
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1023) to repeal section 134 of the Clean Air Act, relating to the greenhouse gas reduction fund; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1121) to prohibit a moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6009) to require the Director of the Bureau of Land Management to withdraw the proposed rule relating to fluid mineral leases and leasing process, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 86) expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy; providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 987) denouncing the harmful, anti-American energy policies of the Biden administration, and for other purposes; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R 7023) to amend section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to codify certain regulatory provisions relating to nationwide permits for dredged or fill material, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
Imagine some leaders made plans about how to keep the air and water clean. This bill is about deciding whether to change those plans, like stopping a rule about air pollution or letting a certain way of getting energy from the ground continue.
Summary AI
H. RES. 1085 sets out the process for the House to consider several bills and resolutions related to energy and environmental policies. One of the bills (H.R. 1023) aims to repeal part of the Clean Air Act concerning greenhouse gas reduction funds. Another bill (H.R. 1121) seeks to prevent a ban on hydraulic fracturing. The resolution also includes considerations for expressing Congress's view against a carbon tax, criticizing the Biden administration's energy policies, and addressing regulations on water pollution permits.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
House Resolution 1085 outlines the legislative process for considering several bills and resolutions that touch upon critical energy and environmental issues. These include repealing a section of the Clean Air Act, regulating hydraulic fracturing, influencing mineral leasing rules, and expressing opposition to a carbon tax. Additionally, the resolution criticizes certain energy policies of the Biden administration and proposes changes to aspects of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
Summary of Significant Issues
The resolution raises several key issues:
Environmental Impact Concerns: The proposal to repeal section 134 of the Clean Air Act could dismantle efforts related to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, potentially impacting climate policies.
Procedural and Transparency Concerns: The method of allowing rapid legislative processing and waiving points of order leads to limited debate and scrutiny, which may affect transparency.
Hydraulic Fracturing Debate: Allowing hydraulic fracturing without proper assessment might raise concerns about environmental and health impacts, lacking a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis.
Partisan Language: Critiquing the Biden administration's energy policies might come across as overly partisan without detailed substantiation, potentially undermining the constructive dialogue necessary for balanced policy decisions.
Complexity and Vagueness: The procedural complexity and use of vague language, such as "for other purposes," could hinder public understanding and engagement with the legislative process.
Impacts on the Public and Stakeholders
The potential impacts of this resolution are multifaceted:
Public and Environmental Groups: Environmental advocates may view the repeal of greenhouse gas reduction measures negatively, as it could hinder efforts to combat climate change. The lack of transparency could erode public trust in the legislative process.
Energy Industry Stakeholders: The bills that facilitate hydraulic fracturing and criticize current energy policies could benefit the energy industry by supporting business activities and opposing additional taxes like the carbon tax.
Local Communities: Community health and safety might be affected by hydraulic fracturing and changes in environmental regulations. These changes could result in environmental degradation or exposure to pollutants, impacting public health.
Economic Implications: While some measures, such as opposing a carbon tax, might be seen as positive for economic growth, they could also disregard the long-term benefits of sustainable practices.
Conclusion
House Resolution 1085 presents a multifaceted approach to energy policies and environmental regulation, raising significant questions about legislative transparency and the balance of environmental and economic interests. As such, it demands careful consideration from the public and stakeholders alike—ensuring that economic opportunities do not come at the expense of environmental sustainability and public health. The resolution highlights the ongoing debate between economic development and environmental protection, a discourse that needs a comprehensive and inclusive dialogue.
Issues
The lack of clear justification or explanation for repealing section 134 of the Clean Air Act in Section 1 might significantly impact environmental policies, raising concerns among environmental stakeholders about the potential negative effects on greenhouse gas reduction efforts.
Section 5 involves language denouncing the energy policies of the Biden administration as harmful and anti-American but fails to provide specific details or evidence to substantiate these claims. This could be seen as a partisan attack rather than a balanced assessment, lacking a comprehensive perspective or input from diverse stakeholders.
The use of 'an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 118–26 shall be considered as adopted' in Sections 1 and 3 is vague due to the absence of the actual content, preventing a clear assessment of its legal and political implications.
The procedural complexity and rapid processing of bills across all sections, such as waiving all points of order (e.g., Sections 1, 2, and 6), may raise issues of transparency and accountability in the legislative process, potentially limiting thorough scrutiny and debate.
In Section 2, the prohibition of a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing without mentioning a cost-benefit or environmental impact analysis could have significant financial and environmental consequences not fully explored.
Section 6's vague language, such as 'for other purposes,' and complex procedural rules for considering amendments, might obscure the transparency and fairness of the legislative process, leading to confusion among the general public about the bill's true intentions and impacts.
The potential fiscal implications or costs associated with directives in Section 3 (e.g., withdrawal of the proposed rule on fluid mineral leases) are not explicitly mentioned, raising concerns over fiscal accountability and potential financial impacts on public resources.
Section 4's brief description without detailing the economic impact of opposing a carbon tax may lead to misunderstandings regarding the resolution's intent and its potential economic and environmental consequences.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The resolution allows the House to consider a bill aimed at repealing a part of the Clean Air Act related to the greenhouse gas reduction fund. It specifies that the bill can be debated for one hour, with no further amendments allowed except for one motion to recommit.
2. Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The resolution allows the House to consider the bill H.R. 1121, which aims to prevent stopping the use of hydraulic fracturing. It states that there should be one hour of debate divided between two committee leaders and permits one opportunity to send the bill back for changes before the final vote.
3. Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The resolution allows the House to consider the bill H.R. 6009, which requires the Director of the Bureau of Land Management to withdraw a proposed rule on fluid mineral leases. It waives any rules that might block the bill's consideration or its contents, adopts an amendment from the Committee on Natural Resources, and sets the bill up to be debated for one hour, split between both parties, with one opportunity to send it back for changes.
4. Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section describes that once this resolution is adopted, it allows for the consideration of a concurrent resolution in the House. This resolution expresses that a carbon tax would be harmful to the U.S. economy, with all objections against both the resolution itself and its provisions being ignored, allowing for one hour of debate split between the committee leaders.
5. Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The resolution H. Res. 987 can be considered in the House without the usual procedural objections, focusing on criticizing the Biden administration's energy policies. It will be discussed for one hour, with time equally shared between leaders of the Energy and Commerce Committee.
6. Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Speaker of the House can initiate the review of Bill H.R. 7023, which aims to amend certain aspects of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The bill's discussion is limited to one hour and can be further amended following specific guidelines, with all procedural objections waived for the amendments mentioned in this section.