PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · May 8, 2024
Mining Regulatory Clarity Act of 2024
This bill sets forth a process to allow mine operations to use, occupy, and conduct operations (e.g., construction of roads and other mining infrastructure activity) on public land regardless of whether a mineral deposit has been discovered on the land.
People & committees
Rep. Amodei, Mark E. [R-NV-2] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 195 (Roll no. 191). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H2963)
House roll call 191 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 195 (Roll no. 191). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H2963)
House roll call 191 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 203 - 208 (Roll no. 190).
House roll call 190 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2981-2982)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 2925, the Chair put the question on the motion to recommit and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Leger Fernandez demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
The previous question on the motion was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
Ms. Leger Fernandez moved to recommit to the Committee on Natural Resources. (text: CR H2967)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 30 minutes of debate on H.R. 2925.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6192, H.R. 7109, H.J. Res. 109 and H.R. 2925. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 6192 under a structured rule and H.R. 7109, H.J. Res. 109, and H.R. 2925 under a closed rule. Rule provides for one hour of general debate on H.R. 6192, H.R. 7109, and H.J. Res. 109, and thirty minutes of general debate on H.R. 2925. One motion to recommit allowed on each bill.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1194. (consideration: CR H2963-2967)
Rule H. Res. 1194 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1194 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6192, H.R. 7109, H.J. Res. 109 and H.R. 2925. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 6192 under a structured rule and H.R. 7109, H.J. Res. 109, and H.R. 2925 under a closed rule. Rule provides for one hour of general debate on H.R. 6192, H.R. 7109, and H.J. Res. 109, and thirty minutes of general debate on H.R. 2925. One motion to recommit allowed on each bill.
On motion to recommit Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 210 - 204 (Roll no. 175).
House roll call 175 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2816)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 2925, the Chair put the question on the motion to recommit and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Leger Fernandez demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
The previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
Ms. Leger Fernandez moved to recommit to the Committee on Natural Resources. (text: CR H2804)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 2925.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 615, H.R. 2925, H.R. 3195, H.R. 764, H.R. 3397, H.R. 6285 and H.R. 6090. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 615, H.R. 2925, H.R. 3195, H.R. 764, H.R. 3397, and H.R. 6090 under a closed rule, and H.R. 6285 under a structured rule. The rule provides for one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1173. (consideration: CR H2797-2804)
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1173 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 615, H.R. 2925, H.R. 3195, H.R. 764, H.R. 3397, H.R. 6285 and H.R. 6090. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 615, H.R. 2925, H.R. 3195, H.R. 764, H.R. 3397, and H.R. 6090 under a closed rule, and H.R. 6285 under a structured rule. The rule provides for one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 342.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-416.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-416.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 24 - 17.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Discharged
Subcommittee Hearings Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 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.2925 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.2925 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.2925 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.2925 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.