Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 21, 2004
Soda Ash Royalty Reduction Act of 2004 - Declares a royalty rate of two percent upon the quantity or gross value of the output of sodium compounds and related products at point of shipment to market from Federal land in the five-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.
Requires the Secretary of the Interior to report to Congress on the effects of such royalty reduction, including: (1) the amount of sodium compounds and related products at point of shipment to market; (2) the number of jobs created or maintained during such reduction period; (3) the total amount of royalty paid to the United States and the portion to the States; and (4) a recommendation of whether the reduced royalty rate should apply after the end of the five-year period.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.4625 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.4625 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.4625 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.4625 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.