PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Burchett, Tim [R-TN-2] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 5, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10422 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10422 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10422 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10422 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-16 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This proposal would require the Commerce Secretary to stop diesel fuel exports to every country when the U.S. average retail diesel price stays above $5 per gallon for 14 straight days. The export ban would continue until the price stays below $4.50 per gallon for 30 straight days. The restriction would apply to diesel exporters.
(a) Prohibition Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Commerce shall prohibit the export of diesel fuel to any country during any period described in subsection (b).
(b) Period described The period described in this subsection is the period that— (1) begins on the date that is the fourteenth consecutive day on which the average retail price of diesel fuel in the United States is greater than $5 per gallon; and (2) ends on the first day after the date described in paragraph (1) that is the thirtieth consecutive day on which such price is less than $4.50 per gallon.
Section 1 would name the bill the Diesel Price Reduction Act of 2026. The title does not establish that the proposed restriction would lower prices.
1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Diesel Price Reduction Act of 2026.
The Commerce Secretary would be required to prohibit diesel exports during qualifying periods, even if another law would otherwise allow them. The prohibition would cover every destination country; the provision lists no country exemptions.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Commerce shall prohibit the export of diesel fuel to any country during any period described in subsection (b).
Each export ban would begin on the 14th consecutive day that the national average retail diesel price exceeds $5 per gallon. A day with a price exactly equal to $5 would not count toward that streak.
(1) begins on the date that is the fourteenth consecutive day on which the average retail price of diesel fuel in the United States is greater than $5 per gallon;
The ban would end on the first day after its start that completes 30 consecutive days with the national average retail diesel price below $4.50 per gallon. A decline below $5 alone would not end it, and a price exactly equal to $4.50 would not count toward the required streak.
(1) begins on the date that is the fourteenth consecutive day on which the average retail price of diesel fuel in the United States is greater than $5 per gallon; and (2) ends on the first day after the date described in paragraph (1) that is the thirtieth consecutive day on which such price is less than $4.50 per gallon.
The supplied action snapshot, updated October 5, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on September 16, 2026. It does not establish subsequent legislative action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-05T20:21:12Z. 2026-09-16: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. 2026-09-16: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-16. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not cover other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 5, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI