Sponsored by
Sen. Curtis, John R. [R-UT]
ID: C001114
Follow the money
The bill
SJRES. 31, 119th Congress — read as touching Oil & Gas.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
25 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
The alignment
This bill's text tracks the "Environmental Protection Agency" section, p. 470-472 of the Mandate for Leadership.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Became Public Law No: 119-20.
June 19, 2025
📍 Current Status
This bill has become law!
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, brought to you by the same geniuses who think a "joint resolution" is an actual solution to anything.
Let's dissect this farce, shall we? SJRES 31 is a Congressional disapproval of an EPA rule that reclassifies major sources as area sources under the Clean Air Act. Wow, thrilling stuff. I can barely contain my excitement.
In reality, this bill is a symptom of a deeper disease: the perpetual tug-of-war between industry lobbyists and environmental regulators. The real illness here is the inability of Congress to make actual policy decisions, instead opting for symbolic gestures that amount to nothing more than a game of regulatory whack-a-mole.
The affected industries? Oh, just the usual suspects: fossil fuel companies, manufacturers, and other polluters who can't be bothered with pesky regulations. The compliance requirements and timelines? Don't worry, they're vague enough to ensure that nobody actually has to do anything meaningful. And enforcement mechanisms? Ha! Those are about as effective as a Band-Aid on a bullet wound.
The economic impact? Well, let's just say it's a convenient coincidence that this bill benefits the same industries that have been pouring money into Congressional campaign coffers. It's almost as if our esteemed lawmakers are more concerned with lining their own pockets than actually protecting the environment or public health.
But hey, who needs actual policy when you can just pretend to care? This bill is a perfect example of "legislative lip service," where politicians get to grandstand about environmental issues without actually doing anything substantive. It's like prescribing a placebo to a patient with a terminal illness – it might make them feel better for a hot second, but ultimately, it's just a waste of time and resources.
In short, SJRES 31 is a joke, a pathetic attempt at governance that only serves to further erode the public's trust in our institutions. But hey, what do I know? I'm just a cynical analyst who's seen this same tired script play out ad nauseam. Wake me up when someone actually tries to pass meaningful legislation that doesn't involve lining the pockets of special interests.
Sen. Curtis, John R. [R-UT]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 5 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: C001047
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001096
Top Contributors
10
ID: L000571
Top Contributors
10
ID: S001198
Top Contributors
10
ID: H001061
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 58 nodes and 40 connections (65 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $295,800
Showing top 17 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 4 helped.
The joint resolution disapproves an EPA rule that would reclassify major sources as area sources under Clean Air Act Section 112, which would have imposed stricter emissions controls on industrial facilities including oil and gas operations. By blocking this rule, the bill provides a regulatory rollback benefit to the oil and gas industry.
The disapproval of the EPA rule that would reclassify major sources as area sources under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act prevents stricter emissions regulations on coal-fired power plants and related facilities, providing a regulatory benefit to the coal mining industry.
By blocking the EPA rule that would reclassify major sources as area sources under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, the resolution avoids imposing stricter hazardous air pollutant regulations on electric utilities, particularly those operating coal-fired plants, thus providing a regulatory benefit.
The disapproval of the EPA rule reduces potential regulatory burdens on midstream energy infrastructure (e.g., pipelines, processing facilities) that could have been subject to stricter area source regulations under Clean Air Act Section 112, providing a benefit to energy infrastructure operators.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Sen. Curtis, John R. [R-UT])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.
This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.
AI Analysis:
"SJRES 31 directly employs the Congressional Review Act to nullify an EPA regulation, which is a core legislative reform advocated in Project 2025. The bill also seeks to maintain more stringent source classifications, aligning with Project 2025’s preference for less restrictive, transparent, and scientifically accountable EPA actions."
— 438 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise and their membership has too often been handpicked to achieve certain politi- cal positions. In the Biden Administration, key EPA advisory committees were purged of balanced perspectives, geographic diversity, important regulatory and private-sector experience, and state, local, and tribal expertise. Contrary to con- gressional directives and recommendations from the GAO and intergovernmental associations, these moves eviscerated historic levels of participation on key com- mittees by state, local, and tribal members from 2017 to 2020. As a result, a variety of EPA regulations lack relevant scientific perspectives, increasing the risks of economic fallout and a failure of cooperative federalism. EPA also has repeatedly disregarded legal requirements regarding the role of these advisory committees and the scope of scientific advice on key regulations.46 Needed Science Policy Reforms Instead of allowing these efforts to be misused for scaremongering risk com- munications and enforcement activities, EPA should embrace so-called citizen science and deputize the public to subject the agency’s science to greater scrutiny, especially in areas of data analysis, identification of scientific flaws, and research misconduct. In addition, EPA should: l Shift responsibility for evaluating misconduct away from its Office of Scientific Integrity, which has been overseen by environmental activists, and toward an independent body. l Work (including with Congress) to provide incentives similar to those under the False Claims Act47 for the public to identify scientific flaws and research misconduct, thereby saving taxpayers from having to bear the costs involved in expending unnecessary resources. l Avoid proprietary, black box models for key regulations. Nearly all major EPA regulations are based on nontransparent models for which the public lacks access or for which significant costs prevent the public from understanding agency analysis. l Reject precautionary default models and uncertainty factors. In the face of uncertainty around associations between certain pollutants and health or welfare endpoints, EPA’s heavy reliance on default assumptions like its low-dose, linear non-threshold model bake orders of magnitude of risk into key regulatory inputs and drive flawed and opaque decisions. Given the disproportionate economic impacts of top-down solutions, EPA should implement an approach that defaults to less restrictive regulatory outcomes. — 439 — Environmental Protection Agency l Refocus its research activities on accountable real-world examinations of the efficacy of its regulations with a heavy emphasis on characterizing and better understanding natural, background, international, and anthropogenic contributions for key pollutants. It should embrace concepts laid out in the 2018 “Back-to-Basics Process for Reviewing National Ambient Air Quality Standards” memo48 to ensure that any science and risk assessment for the NAAQS matches congressional direction. Legislative Reforms While some reforms can be achieved administratively (especially in areas where EPA clearly lacks congressional authorization for its activities), Congress should prioritize several EPA science activity reforms: l Use of the Congressional Review Act for Congress to disapprove of EPA regulations and other quasi-regulatory actions and prohibit “substantially similar” actions in the future. l Reform EPA’s Science Advisory Board and other advisory bodies to ensure independence, balance, transparency, and geographic diversity. l Build on recent bipartisan proposals to increase transparency for advisory bodies, subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act49 as well as recommendations from the Administrative Conference of the U.S., to strengthen provisions for independence, accountability, geographic diversity, turnover, and public participation. This should include a prohibition on peer review activities for unaccountable third parties that lack independence or application of these same principles to non- governmental peer review bodies (including NASEM). l Add teeth to long-standing executive orders, memoranda, recommendations, and other policies to require that EPA regulations are based on transparent, reproducible science as well as that the data and publications resulting from taxpayer-funded activities are made immediately available to the public. l Reject funds for programs that have not been authorized by Congress (like IRIS) as well as peer review activities that have not been authorized by Congress. l Revisit and repeal or reform outdated environmental statutes. A high priority should be the repeal or reform of the Global Change Research Act of 1990,50 which has been misused for political purposes.
AI Analysis:
"SJRES 31 directly supports Project 2025's goal to restore the Trump EPA position on 'Once-In, Always-In' by blocking EPA's attempt to reclassify major sources as area sources, thereby maintaining stricter regulatory classification and preventing regulatory rollbacks that Project 2025 seeks to limit."
— 425 — Environmental Protection Agency are statutorily required, and remove any regulatory differences between attainment and maintenance that are not explicitly required by law. l Streamline the process for state and local governments to demonstrate that their federally funded highway projects will not interfere with NAAQS attainment. l Adopt policies to prevent abuse of EPA’s CAA “error correction” authority.20 EPA historically has used this to coerce states into adopting its favored policies on pain of imposition of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). l Limit EPA’s reliance on CAA § 30121 general rulemaking authority to ensure that it is not abused to issue regulations for which EPA lacks substantive authority elsewhere in the statute. l If possible, return the standard-setting role to Congress. Climate Change l Remove the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) for any source category that is not currently being regulated. The overall reporting program imposes significant burdens on small businesses and companies that are not being regulated. This is either a pointless burden or a sword-of- Damocles threat of future regulation, neither of which is appropriate. l Establish a system, with an appropriate deadline, to update the 2009 endangerment finding. l Establish a significant emissions rate (SER) for greenhouse gasses (GHGs). Regulating Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act22 l Repeal Biden Administration implementing regulations for the AIM Act that are unnecessarily stringent and costly. l Refrain from granting petitions from opportunistic manufacturers to add new restrictions that further skew the market toward costlier refrigerants and equipment. — 426 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Conduct realistic cost assessments that reflect actual consumer experiences instead of the current unrealistic ones claiming that the program is virtually cost-free. Mobile Source Regulation by the Office of Transportation and Air Quality l Establish GHG car standards under Department of Transportation (DOT) leadership that properly consider cost, choice, safety, and national security. l Review the existing “ramp rate” for car standards to ensure that it is actually achievable. l Include life cycle emissions of electric vehicles and consider all of their environmental impacts. l Restore the position that California’s waiver applies only to California- specific issues like ground-level ozone, not global climate issues. l Ensure that other states can adopt California’s standards only for traditional/criteria pollutants, not greenhouse gases. l Stop the use of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to increase standards on airplanes. l Reconsider the Cleaner Trucks Initiative to balance the goal of driving down emissions without creating significant costs or complex burdens on the industry. Air Permitting Reforms for New Source Review (Pre-Construction Per- mits) and Title V (Operating Permits) l Develop reforms to ensure that when a facility improves efficiency within its production process, new permitting requirements are not triggered. l Restore the Trump EPA position on Once-In, Always-In (that major sources can convert to area sources when affiliated emissions standards are met). l Revisit permitting and enforcement assumptions that sources will operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year; this artificially inflates a source’s potential to emit (PTE), which can result in more stringent permit terms.
AI Analysis:
"SJRES 31 aligns with Project 2025's goal of limiting EPA's regulatory overreach by blocking an EPA rule that reclassified major pollution sources as area sources to reduce regulatory burdens, which reflects broader efforts to prevent EPA from using its authority to implement policies not explicitly authorized by statute."
— 425 — Environmental Protection Agency are statutorily required, and remove any regulatory differences between attainment and maintenance that are not explicitly required by law. l Streamline the process for state and local governments to demonstrate that their federally funded highway projects will not interfere with NAAQS attainment. l Adopt policies to prevent abuse of EPA’s CAA “error correction” authority.20 EPA historically has used this to coerce states into adopting its favored policies on pain of imposition of a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). l Limit EPA’s reliance on CAA § 30121 general rulemaking authority to ensure that it is not abused to issue regulations for which EPA lacks substantive authority elsewhere in the statute. l If possible, return the standard-setting role to Congress. Climate Change l Remove the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) for any source category that is not currently being regulated. The overall reporting program imposes significant burdens on small businesses and companies that are not being regulated. This is either a pointless burden or a sword-of- Damocles threat of future regulation, neither of which is appropriate. l Establish a system, with an appropriate deadline, to update the 2009 endangerment finding. l Establish a significant emissions rate (SER) for greenhouse gasses (GHGs). Regulating Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act22 l Repeal Biden Administration implementing regulations for the AIM Act that are unnecessarily stringent and costly. l Refrain from granting petitions from opportunistic manufacturers to add new restrictions that further skew the market toward costlier refrigerants and equipment.
Showing 3 of 5 policy matches
Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.
A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 111 South Tremont Street in Tremonton, Utah, as the "Sorensen-Estrada Post Office".
119/s/4523
CCP IP Act
119/s/330
A bill to amend the National Trails System Act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study on the feasibility of designating the Bonneville Shoreline Trail.
119/s/1135