A Republican bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (text: CR S2759-2766)
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
The "Let America Build Act of 2026" aims to speed up energy development and reform permitting processes for oil, gas, and minerals. It limits the ability of courts to cancel leases and shortens timelines for environmental reviews and protests. The bill delegates certain permitting authorities to states and restricts the Federal Government's role in regulating hydraulic fracturing where state rules exist. It also streamlines liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports and modifies how the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) evaluates environmental effects. Finally, it creates new rules for mineral exploration and establishes an Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fund.
Yes· 3 of 20
- Scored +8
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
It allows states to apply for exclusive authority to issue drilling permits and defers to state hydraulic fracturing rules.
- Scored +7
Would business owners be better off under this?
Significantly reduces regulatory burdens and timelines for energy and mining companies.
- Scored +6
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Brings direct investment and employment opportunities to rural areas where energy resources are located.
The opposite· 3 of 8
- Scored -9
Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced?
The bill is specifically designed to increase oil, gas, and coal production through permitting reform.
- Scored -8
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
It limits the scope of NEPA reviews, shortens protest windows, and restricts the ability of courts to vacate lease sales.
- Scored -7
Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?
The bill accelerates fossil fuel extraction and excludes downstream greenhouse gas emissions from environmental reviews.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Faster LNG Export Approvals: The Secretary of Energy must issue final decisions on covered LNG export applications within 45 days of the conclusion of environmental reviews, which may speed up energy exports (Section 1301(b)).
- Simplified Small Scale LNG Access: Certain LNG exportations (up to 51.75 billion cubic feet per year) and exports to nations with free trade agreements are deemed consistent with the public interest and granted without delay (Section 1302(c)(1)).
- State-Led Permitting: States can apply for exclusive authority to issue drilling permits and approve drilling plans on available Federal land, potentially making the process more local and efficient (Section 1201(b)(1)).
- Support for Mine Cleanup: The bill establishes an Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fund to carry out activities related to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Section 2006(f)(2)).
- Increased Public Transparency: The Commission must track and make public the schedules, required actions, and points of contact for natural gas project authorizations on its website (Section 3003(g)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Reduced Environmental Review: If the Secretary denies a protest to a lease sale, that lease is not subject to further environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Section 1101(a)(1)).
- Limited Legal Challenges: Lawsuits contesting oil and gas lease decisions must be filed within 60 days, which limits the time people have to challenge these actions in court (Section 1101(a)(4)).
- Reduced Court Power to Stop Projects: Courts cannot vacate lease sales even if environmental reviews are found to be in violation; they must instead remand the matter to the Secretary (Section 1101(a)(2)).
- Narrower Definition of Environmental Effects: The bill limits "effects" to physical changes that are reasonably foreseeable, not remote, and not the product of a lengthy causal chain, and explicitly excludes upstream or downstream emissions (Section 3001(g)(1)).
- Restriction on Land Designations: Heads of Federal land management agencies are prohibited from creating new categories of Federal land designations unless authorized by statute (Section 2003).
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 business owners be better off under this? — Significantly reduces regulatory burdens and timelines for energy and mining companies. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Brings direct investment and employment opportunities to rural areas where energy resources are located. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Benefits those with significant holdings in the energy sector. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Benefits investors in the oil, gas, and mining sectors. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Benefits owners and executives of large energy corporations. Would union members be better off under this? — Increased energy and mining activity typically increases demand for skilled union labor in construction and operation. Would farmers be better off under this? — Mineral development on rural lands can provide additional lease income for landowners. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Potential reduction in home heating and gasoline costs due to increased energy supply. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Potential reduction in energy costs. Would children be better off under this? — Reduced environmental protections may lead to long-term negative ecological impacts for future generations. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Increased drilling and mining on federal lands may conflict with tribal interests, though some tribal authority is recognized.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — Energy and mineral development projects are often concentrated in rural areas, bringing infrastructure and economic activity. Is this likely to lower the price at the pump? — Increased domestic supply of oil and gas typically leads to lower energy prices for consumers. Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced? — The bill is specifically designed to increase oil, gas, and coal production through permitting reform. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — It limits the scope of NEPA reviews, shortens protest windows, and restricts the ability of courts to vacate lease sales. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — The bill accelerates fossil fuel extraction and excludes downstream greenhouse gas emissions from environmental reviews. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — The bill restricts the creation of new land designations and reduces federal oversight in favor of state-led permitting.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Accelerating energy development and reducing regulatory hurdles generally promotes short-term economic growth in the energy sector. Is this likely to create jobs? — Streamlining permitting for energy and mineral projects is likely to stimulate industrial activity and job growth in those sectors. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Expedited LNG and mineral permitting processes lower the barrier to entry for smaller energy firms. Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — Increasing domestic energy production and LNG exports could potentially lower energy costs and reduce inflation.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this make trade with other countries easier? — The bill explicitly streamlines and expands the exportation of liquefied natural gas to international markets. Does this strengthen ties with allied countries? — Increasing LNG exports can strengthen energy ties and alliances with trade partners.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — It allows states to apply for exclusive authority to issue drilling permits and defers to state hydraulic fracturing rules. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires FERC to make project schedules and points of contact public on its website. Does this make it easier to do business across state lines? — Streamlining energy infrastructure and LNG exports facilitates interstate and international commerce. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill significantly shifts permitting and regulatory authority from the federal government to the states. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill shortens the window for legal challenges to 60 days and limits the power of courts to vacate lease sales.
- 6/11/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (text: CR S2759-2766)
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
Cynthia LummisRepublican · Wyoming