- Targeted stakeholdersCreates a predictable, uniform ten-year payment schedule for deferred bonus payments.
- Federal agenciesEnsures an immediate initial cash payment to the federal government with each bid.
- Targeted stakeholdersMay reduce payment default risk by requiring the first installment upon bidding.
To amend the Mineral Leasing Act to provide for the payment of bonus payments of certain coal leases issued under that Act.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Amends the Mineral Leasing Act to require that bonus payments for certain coal leases issued under a deferred bonus payment system be paid in 10 equal annual installments, with the first installment submitted with the bid.
Technically narrow and administrable but politically sensitive subject and absent offsets reduce prospects, especially in a closely divided chamber.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that prescribes a 10‑year installment schedule for certain deferred coal lease bonus payments. It succeeds in specifying the basic payment mechanism but omits many implementation, fiscal, and enforcement details that would typically accompany a substantive change affecting federal receipts and leasing operations.
Climate impact versus support for domestic coal industry
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
- Targeted stakeholdersHigher upfront cost may deter smaller companies from bidding, reducing competition.
- Federal agenciesFewer or lower bids could reduce total federal receipts from coal leasing.
- DevelopersIncreased capital requirements could raise project financing costs for coal developers.
Why the argument around this bill splits.
Climate impact versus support for domestic coal industry
Sees the bill as a narrow change that nonetheless makes coal leasing more administratively favorable.
Likely views it as encouraging continued fossil fuel extraction and undermining climate and clean energy goals.
Considers potential local job arguments but remains skeptical given climate harms.
Views the bill as a technical, narrowly targeted fiscal change with both pros and cons.
Appreciates administrative predictability but worries about delayed receipts and potential moral hazard.
Wants safeguards like surety, fiscal estimates, and environmental compliance.
Likely favors the bill as pro-energy, pro-industry reform that reduces upfront barriers and supports domestic coal production and jobs.
Sees it as a limited deregulatory, market-friendly tweak without broad new regulatory burdens.
Wants implementation to avoid additional constraints.
The path through Congress.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow and administrable but politically sensitive subject and absent offsets reduce prospects, especially in a closely divided chamber.
- No Congressional Budget Office cost estimate provided
- Extent of committee or floor support unknown
Recent votes on the bill.
No vote history yet
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Go deeper than the headline read.
Climate impact versus support for domestic coal industry
Technically narrow and administrable but politically sensitive subject and absent offsets reduce prospects, especially in a closely divided…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that prescribes a 10‑year installment schedule for certain deferred coal lease bonus payments. It succeeds in specifying the basic pa…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.