PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 14, 2011
Federal Accounting of Renewable Energy Act of 2011 or FARE Act of 2011 - Requires the head of each federal agency to submit to Congress an accounting for all FY2009-FY2011 financial support (including grants, loans, loan guarantees, and direct payments) made by the agency to promote the production or use of renewable energy.
Directs the agencies to include in such accounting: (1) a list of the projects that directly led to the production or use of renewable energy; (2) the quantity of renewable energy or products on the market as a direct result of such support and the gross sales of the recipient company during a recent fiscal year; and (3) the total quantity of financial support, the number of jobs created, and the average cost to the recipient company of each full-time job created.
Requires, for each project, a full accounting of: (1) the employment, sales, and revenue targets submitted by each recipient company before receiving support and a list of the companies that substantially failed to meet targets; (2) a list of all recipient companies that received support but are no longer in operation or have moved any portion of their operations to China; and (3) a list of all venture capital firms involved in submitting the proposal for awarded support.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Inspector General of an agency that provided support to a company that is no longer in existence, or is unlikely to achieve substantially the purpose of the support, to conduct a preliminary investigation of the documents submitted by the company to determine whether fraud was committed in obtaining such support.
Requires the Inspector General of the Department of Energy (DOE) to submit to Congress a list of the recipient company executives who: (1) received financial support from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory during any of calendar years 2009-2011, and (2) had an immediate family member who was employed by the Laboratory as of the date of receipt of the financial support.
People & committees
Sen. Vitter, David [R-LA] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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 S.1556 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 S.1556 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 S.1556 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 S.1556 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.