PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 348.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 28, 2025
Critical Mineral Consistency Act of 2025
This bill modifies the Energy Act of 2020 to expand the definition of critical minerals to include critical materials designated by the Department of Energy (DOE).
Under current law, DOE's critical materials list contains certain materials that are essential for energy, including those on the critical minerals list of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The USGS's list, which contains certain minerals that are essential to the nation's economic or national security, is not required to include the materials on DOE's list. Currently, both lists include minerals with a high risk of supply chain disruptions, and both DOE and USGS must conduct a variety of efforts to ensure a secure and reliable supply chain of the minerals.
By expanding the definition of critical minerals, this bill requires the USGS to include on its list the materials on DOE's list. Within 45 days of DOE adding a mineral, element, substance, or material to its critical materials list, the USGS must update its list to include such mineral, element, substance, or material.
People & committees
Rep. Ciscomani, Juan [R-AZ-6] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 348.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2353-2354)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2353-2354)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 755.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2353-2356)
Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 444.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-519.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-519.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
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: Jul 13, 2026. 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.755 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.755 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.755 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.755 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.