A Democratic bill with 5 Democratic cosponsors · See all 5 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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 is called the Gas Money Saved Act. It tells the head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to start a process to look at corporate average fuel economy standards again. This happens if gas prices go up at least 5 times faster than overall inflation based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data over a certain time. The bill also changes certain civil penalties by replacing $0.00'' with $25'' and ``$50''.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +3
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income households, for whom fuel costs represent a larger percentage of spending, benefit from reviews aimed at curbing excessive gasoline price spikes.
- Scored +3
Is this likely to lower the price at the pump?
By mandating a reevaluation of fuel economy standards during periods of extreme gasoline price inflation, the bill aims to mitigate high pump prices.
- Scored +2
Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this?
Young adults who rely on vehicles for commuting will benefit from potential relief when gasoline prices rise significantly.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Section 2(a)(1) requires the Administrator to reevaluate corporate average fuel economy standards if national average gasoline prices rise at least 5 times faster than overall inflation. This could be positive because it forces a review when gas prices spike compared to general inflation.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 2(b) changes penalties in section 32912 of title 49, United States Code, by replacing
$0.00'' with$25'' and ``$50''. This could be seen as a negative burden because it brings back or increases monetary penalties for violations.
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.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income households, for whom fuel costs represent a larger percentage of spending, benefit from reviews aimed at curbing excessive gasoline price spikes. Would farmers be better off under this? — Farmers who rely heavily on fuel-powered machinery and transport benefit from policies addressing rapid increases in gasoline prices. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Drivers who commute and purchase fuel benefit from potential reevaluations of fuel economy standards when gas prices spike. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class households experience relief when fuel economy standards are reevaluated during periods of high gasoline price inflation. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors who drive will benefit from measures triggered to address excessive gasoline price increases. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults who rely on vehicles for commuting will benefit from potential relief when gasoline prices rise significantly.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Is this likely to lower the price at the pump? — By mandating a reevaluation of fuel economy standards during periods of extreme gasoline price inflation, the bill aims to mitigate high pump prices.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — The bill requires reevaluation of corporate average fuel economy standards when gasoline prices spike, which may help address rapid increases in fuel costs.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill grants federal administrative mandate to NHTSA to reevaluate standards and restores monetary penalties for non-compliance.
- 10/22/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/15/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Maxwell FrostDemocrat · Florida
Doris MatsuiDemocrat · California
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Lateefah SimonDemocrat · California
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan