A Democratic bill with 3 Democratic cosponsors · See all 3 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "Methane Pollution Accountability Act," aims to change how royalties are collected for gas produced from Federal land and the outer Continental Shelf. For new leases, royalties would be assessed on all gas produced, including gas lost through venting, flaring, or negligent releases. Certain exceptions apply to emergencies, gas used for the benefit of the lease area, or gas that is unavoidably lost. Additionally, the Director of the Bureau of Land Management is directed to enforce a specific waste prevention rule from April 2024. The bill also places restrictions on finalizing certain other proposed or revision rules unless specific certifications are met.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +6
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill requires certifications that new rules must improve air quality and public health.
- Scored +5
Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?
By penalizing the loss of gas through venting and flaring, the bill incentivizes waste reduction and lower methane emissions.
- Scored +4
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?
The bill strengthens federal oversight and enforcement of waste prevention on federal lands.
The opposite
- Scored -4
Would business owners be better off under this?
Increases operational costs and royalty burdens for oil and gas companies.
- Scored -1
Is this likely to lower the price at the pump?
Increased production costs for gas companies could lead to higher prices for consumers.
- Scored -1
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
Could contribute to higher energy costs.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Accountability for Gas Waste: Under Section 2(a), royalties would be assessed on all gas produced, including gas lost through venting, flaring, or negligent releases. This could ensure that gas that would otherwise be lost is accounted for through royalty payments.
-
Protection of Air Quality and Public Health: Section 3 prevents the finalization of certain rules unless the Director certifies that the new rule will improve air quality and public health.
-
Reduction of Natural Gas Waste: Section 3 restricts the finalization of certain rules unless the Director certifies that the rule will further minimize the waste of natural gas from oil and gas leases.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Increased Costs for Gas Production: Section 2(a) requires royalties to be assessed on all gas produced, which includes gas that is consumed or lost through venting, flaring, or negligent releases during upstream operations.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill requires certifications that new rules must improve air quality and public health. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — By penalizing the loss of gas through venting and flaring, the bill incentivizes waste reduction and lower methane emissions. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — The bill strengthens federal oversight and enforcement of waste prevention on federal lands. Is this likely to lower the price at the pump? — Increased production costs for gas companies could lead to higher prices for consumers.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this raise the taxes companies pay? — The bill increases the royalty burden on gas production companies by requiring payments on all gas produced, including that lost to venting or flaring. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — It improves federal revenue capture by ensuring royalties are paid on all gas produced rather than just exported or sold gas.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal revenue collection and oversight regarding natural resource production.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would children be better off under this? — Potential health benefits from improved air quality. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Possible health benefits from cleaner air. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Potential health benefits from reduced air pollution. Would business owners be better off under this? — Increases operational costs and royalty burdens for oil and gas companies. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Could contribute to higher energy costs.
- 8/20/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/6/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Julia BrownleyDemocrat · California
Jared HuffmanDemocrat · California
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia