PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 464.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 19, 2006
American-Made Energy and Good Jobs Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to establish, implement, and administer a competitive oil and gas leasing program on the Coastal Plain of Alaska.
Repeals the prohibition against production or leasing of oil and gas resources from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
Declares that this Act is in compliance with specified environmental requirements and is compatible with ANWR purposes.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Secretary to designate up to a total of 45,000 acres of the Coastal Plain as a Special Area, after consultation with the state of Alaska, the city of Kaktovik, and the North Slope Borough.
Permits directional drilling in such Special Areas.
Prescribes guidelines for implementation of lease sales.
Sets forth: (1) a "no significant adverse effect" standard to govern Coastal Plain activities; (2) guidelines for expedited judicial review; and (3) a plan for federal and state distribution of revenues.
Directs the Secretary to issue rights-of-way and easements across the Coastal Plain for the transportation of oil and gas.
Provides for financial assistance for local government impact aid and community service assistance.
Establishes in the Treasury the Coastal Plain Local Government Impact Aid Assistance Fund.
People & committees
Rep. Pombo, Richard W. [R-CA-11] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 464.
Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 225 - 201 (Roll no. 209). (text: CR H3245-3247)
House roll call 209 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 225 - 201 (Roll no. 209).(text: CR H3245-3247)
House roll call 209 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 201 - 223 (Roll no. 208). (consideration: CR H3266-3267)
House roll call 208 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3266-3268)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the motion to recommit H.R. 5429 with instructions, the Chair put the question on the motion and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. George Miller demanded the yeas and and nays and pursuant to a previous order of the House, the Chair postponed further proceedings on the adoption of the motion until later in the legislative day.
The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H3260)
Floor summary: DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the George Miller motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require that the bill be reported back forthwith, with an amendment to provide that under the bill, persons shall not be treated as qualified to obtain leases if such person is a lessee under an existing lease issued by he Department of Interior pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Deep Water Royalty Relief Act that is not subject to limitations on royalty relief based on market price.
Mr. Miller, George moved to recommit with instructions to Resources. (consideration: CR H3258-3259, H3266-3267; text: CR H3258)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H3259)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 5429.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5429 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 835. (consideration: CR H3245-3259)
ORDER OF PROCEDURE - Mr. Bishop of Utah asked unanimous consent that, during consideration of H.R. 5429 pursuant to H. Res. 835, the Speaker may postpone further proceedings on a motion to recommit as though under clause 8(a)(1)(A) of Rule 20. Agreed to without objection.
Rule H. Res. 835 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 835 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5429 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments.
Referred to the House Committee on 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: Apr 7, 2025. 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.5429 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.5429 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.5429 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.5429 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.