To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to clarify the minimum distribution under that Act to certain States and Indian tribes.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 31, 2007
Makes a technical amendment to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 with respect to minimum distributions from the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund to certain states and Indian tribes with approved abandoned mine reclamation programs.
Exempts from any other requirements or restrictions of such Act the requirement that the Secretary of the Interior ensure that grant awards for approved abandoned mine reclamation programs total at least $3 million annually to each state and each Indian tribe with an approved program (including those which otherwise do not meet the active mining threshold for full funding), as well as eligible land and water, so long as an allocation of funds to the state or tribe is necessary to achieve specified reclamation priorities.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.4025 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.4025 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.4025 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.4025 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.