PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 268 - 157 (Roll no. 527). (consideration: CR H7092-7093)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 23, 2008
Consumer Energy Supply Act of 2008 - Instructs the Secretary of Energy to publish a plan to: (1) sell prescribed amounts of light grade petroleum from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and acquire an equivalent volume of heavy grade petroleum; (2) deposit cash proceeds from those sales into the SPR Petroleum Account; and (3) withdraw from such proceeds the administrative and operational costs of the sale and acquisition.
Requires an offer for sale of 70 million barrels of light grade petroleum from the SPR.
Requires the sale to: (1) commence within 30 days after enactment of this Act, regardless of whether the Secretary's plan has been published; and (2) be completed within six months after enactment, with at least 20 million barrels offered for sale within the first 60 days after enactment.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth an acquisitions schedule for heavy grade petroleum to replace the light grade petroleum sold under this Act.
Encourages the Secretary to grant requests to defer scheduled deliveries of petroleum to the SPR if deferral will result in a premium paid in additional barrels of oil which will reduce the cost of oil acquisition and increase the volume of oil delivered to the SPR or yield additional cash bonuses.
People & committees
Rep. Lampson, Nick [D-TX-22] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 268 - 157 (Roll no. 527). (consideration: CR H7092-7093)
House roll call 527 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 268 - 157 (Roll no. 527).(consideration: CR H7092-7093)
House roll call 527 · Individual votesDEBATE - Mr. Barton (TX) asked unanimous consent that debate on the motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 6578 be extended by 15 minutes, equally divided and controlled. Agreed to without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6578.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7079-7093; text of measure as introduced: CR H7079-7080)
Mr. Barrow moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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.6578 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.6578 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.6578 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.6578 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.