PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 17, 2008
Maximize Offshore Resource Exploration Act of 2008, or the MORE Act of 2008 - Declares without force or effect all federal prohibitions against the expenditure of appropriated funds to conduct natural gas leasing and pre-leasing activities for any area of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
Revokes all withdrawals of federal submerged lands from leasing for oil and natural gas exploration and production.
Amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from granting an oil or natural gas lease for any OCS located within 25 miles of a state coastline unless the state has enacted a law approving the issuance of such leases by the Secretary.
Sets forth an allocation schedule for a 75% state share of revenues derived from U.S. royalties under qualified oil and gas leases on submerged lands located within the seaward boundaries of a state.
Extends the jurisdiction of state civil and criminal law, as appropriate, to the Alaska, Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, and Atlantic OCS Region State Adjacent Zones and OCS Planning Areas.
People & committees
Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-44] · 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 Natural Resources.
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: Aug 14, 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.6529 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.6529 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.6529 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.6529 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.