PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 25, 2005
Prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from conducting a lease sale or issuing a lease for oil or gas in the Southern, Central, and Northern California Panning Areas until the later of January 1, 2011, or 45 days of continuous session of Congress after issuance of the final environmental impact statement relating to the second five-year oil and gas leasing program prepared under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act after enactment of this Act.
Prohibits the Secretary from approving any exploration plan, development and production plan, or application for permit to drill, or from permitting any drilling, for oil and gas in such Planning Areas until 45 days of continuous session of Congress after submission to Congress of certain completed and peer-reviewed environmental studies.
People & committees
Rep. Cunningham, Randy (Duke) [R-CA-50] · R–CA
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 Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E59)
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: Feb 7, 2024. 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.319 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.319 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.319 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.319 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.