Congress cuts federal mineral revenue to boost state and industry payouts
S. 451 — Restoring State Mineral Revenues Act · Filed by Steve Daines (R-MT) · 6 cosponsors · Introduced Feb 6, 2025 · Hearing held
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill amends the Mineral Leasing Act to eliminate an administrative fee that the federal government collects from mineral lease revenues before distributing them to states. The bill strikes the subsection of the Mineral Leasing Act that authorized this fee, allowing states to receive a larger share of revenues from oil, gas, and mineral leases on federal lands.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative effect is to eliminate a federal fee on mineral lease revenues, increasing the share flowing to states and mineral lessees. This is a revenue transfer from the federal government to state and private beneficiaries, functionally a subsidy to the mineral extraction sector.
What the text implies
- Reduces federal revenue available for public lands management, conservation, and restoration on the same lands from which minerals are extracted.
- Increases state revenues, but does not mandate how states use those funds — they may not dedicate them to public benefit or conservation.
- Mineral extraction companies benefit indirectly by reducing the total cost of federal mineral leases, making extraction more profitable.
- The bill's conforming amendments to the Geothermal Steam Act and Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act suggest the fee elimination applies across multiple extraction regimes, broadening the revenue loss.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
While states gain revenue, ordinary citizens lose federal income that would otherwise fund public services, conservation, and land management. The bill transfers wealth from the federal treasury (funded by all taxpayers) to state governments and the mineral extraction industry, reducing resources available for nationwide public goods.
Who stands to gain
- state governments (increased mineral lease revenues)
- oil and gas extraction companies (lower effective lease costs)
- mineral extraction industry broadly
Named in the bill
Mineral Leasing Act, Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands, Geothermal Steam Act of 1970, Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982, Section 35 of the Mineral Leasing Act, state governments, federal government, mineral lessees
Where it stands
6 cosponsors: 6 Republicans.
- Feb 6, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
- Feb 6, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources”
- Dec 2, 2025 — Hearing held · Congress.gov: “Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (1,665 characters) on Jun 8, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
As of — page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Congress cuts federal mineral revenue to boost state and industry payouts” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/s451 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.