PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 712 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4365, H.R. 1130 and H. Res. 684. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 4365, under a structured rule; H.R. 1130, under a structured rule; and H.Res. 684, under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of general debate on all three bills.
Congressional Research Service
Version 07 · Reported to House · Mar 23, 2023
Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2023
This bill repeals certain restrictions on the import and export of natural gas under the Natural Gas Act, including restrictions related to free trade agreements.
In addition, the bill grants the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the exclusive authority to approve or deny applications for the siting, construction, expansion, or operation of facilities (e.g., liquefied natural gas terminals) to export natural gas to foreign countries or import natural gas from foreign countries.
People & committees
Rep. Johnson, Bill [R-OH-6] · R–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 712 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4365, H.R. 1130 and H. Res. 684. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 4365, under a structured rule; H.R. 1130, under a structured rule; and H.Res. 684, under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of general debate on all three bills.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 699 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1130, H. Res. 684 and H.R. 5525. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 1130, under a structured rule; H.Res. 684, under a closed rule; and H.R. 5525, under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of general debate on all three bills.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 11.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-18.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-18.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 27 - 21.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 16 - 9 .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate and Grid Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. 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.1130 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.1130 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.1130 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.1130 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.