PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 13, 2011
Oil Consumer Protection Act of 2011 - No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2011 or NOPEC - Amends the Sherman Act to declare it to be illegal and a violation of the Act for any foreign state or instrumentality thereof to act collectively or in combination with any other foreign state or any other person, whether by cartel or any other association or form of cooperation or joint action, to limit the production or distribution of oil, natural gas, or any other petroleum product (petroleum), to set or maintain the price of petroleum, or to otherwise take any action in restraint of trade for petroleum, when such action has a direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect on the market, supply, price, or distribution of petroleum in the United States.
Denies a foreign state engaged in such conduct sovereign immunity from the jurisdiction or judgments of U.S. courts in any action brought to enforce this Act.
States that no U.S. court shall decline, based on the act of state doctrine, to make a determination on the merits in an action brought under this Act.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Attorney General (DOJ) to bring an action in U.S. district court to enforce this Act.
Amends the federal judicial code to make an exception to the jurisdictional immunity of a foreign state in an action brought under this Act.
Oil and Gas Industry Antitrust Act of 2011 - Amends the Clayton Act to make it unlawful for any person to refuse to sell, or to export or divert, existing supplies of petroleum, gasoline, or natural gas with the primary intention of increasing prices or creating a shortage in a geographic market.
Requires a study on: (1) the applicability of monopoly prohibitions of the Clayton Act to persons engaged in exploring for, producing, refining, storing, marketing, or selling petroleum, gasoline, or natural gas; and (2) the effectiveness of divestitures required under certain federal consent decrees.
Requires the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to establish a joint federal-state task force to investigate information-sharing among persons engaged in exploring for, producing, refining, storing, marketing, or selling petroleum, gasoline, or natural gas.
Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act - Makes it unlawful for any person, during a proclaimed international crisis affecting the oil market, to sell gasoline or any other petroleum distillate at a price that: (1) is unconscionably excessive; and (2) indicates the seller is taking unfair advantage of the circumstances of the crisis to increase prices unreasonably. Authorizes the President to issue such a proclamation for up to a 30-day period, and to renew it as necessary.
Sets forth factors to be considered in determining if a violation of this Act has occurred. Requires the FTC to enforce a violation as an unfair or deceptive act or practice and to give priority to enforcement actions concerning companies with U.S. sales over $10 billion per year. Prescribes civil and criminal penalties for violations. Authorizes a state to bring a civil action for enforcement.
People & committees
Rep. Conyers, John, Jr. [D-MI-14] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E898-899)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 8, 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.1899 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.1899 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.1899 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.1899 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.