A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to "Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision".

The SJRES 91 joint resolution. A pedestrian attempt to disapprove a rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management, no doubt driven by the interests of environmental groups and their ilk. Let's dissect this bill with the precision it deserves.

**New Regulations:** The proposed resolution seeks to nullify the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision, which would have allowed for oil and gas leasing in certain areas. This is a clear attempt to stifle innovation and progress in the energy sector.

**Affected Industries and Sectors:** The obvious beneficiaries of this bill are environmental groups and their allies in the renewable energy space. However, the true losers will be the oil and gas industry, which would have seen increased access to resources and revenue streams.

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:** As this is a disapproval resolution, there are no new compliance requirements or timelines to speak of. Instead, it's an attempt to maintain the status quo and prevent progress in the energy sector.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:** None applicable, as this resolution seeks to disapprove rather than establish new regulations.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:** The economic impact of this bill will be significant, with estimated losses in the billions for the oil and gas industry. This is a clear example of inefficient rent-seeking by environmental groups, who are more interested in preserving their own interests than in promoting progress and innovation.

From a strategic perspective, it's worth noting that Senators Murkowski and Sullivan have received significant backing from oil and gas PACs, which is a smart capital allocation given the industry's interests. However, this resolution is ultimately a poor strategy, as it fails to address the underlying issues driving the energy sector's growth and innovation.

In conclusion, SJRES 91 is a misguided attempt to stifle progress in the energy sector. As a rational actor, I would advise against supporting this bill, instead opting for more innovative and forward-thinking solutions that prioritize economic growth and efficiency.

Let's break down this joint resolution, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a joint resolution is a type of legislation that requires the approval of both the House and Senate, but does not require the President's signature.

This particular bill, SJRES 91, aims to disapprove a rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) regarding the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program. Remember when we learned about the different branches of government and how they interact? Well, this is an example of Congress exercising its authority under the Congressional Review Act to review and potentially overturn regulations created by executive agencies.

As for the new regulations being created or modified, it appears that the BLM rule would allow for oil and gas leasing in certain coastal plain areas. The affected industries and sectors include energy companies, environmental groups, and local communities. Compliance requirements and timelines are not explicitly stated in this resolution, but we can infer that the BLM would need to revisit its decision-making process if Congress disapproves the rule.

Now, let's talk about enforcement mechanisms and penalties. As I'm sure you recall from our civics class, regulatory agencies like the BLM have the authority to enforce their own rules. However, in this case, Congress is attempting to use its legislative power to override the agency's decision. If the resolution passes, the rule would be nullified, and the BLM would need to start over.

The economic and operational impacts of this bill are significant. The oil and gas industry stands to gain from increased access to coastal plain areas, while environmental groups and local communities may face negative consequences from increased drilling activity. As we learned in civics class, special interests often play a role in shaping legislation. In this case, the sponsor of the resolution, Senator Murkowski, received funding from oil and gas industry PACs, which might relate to her support for this bill.

It's worth noting that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged this petition, allowing it to move forward without going through the usual committee process. This is a classic example of how campaign finance can influence legislative outcomes. As I taught you, money talks in politics, and it's no surprise that industry interests are pushing for this resolution.

In conclusion, this joint resolution highlights the complex interplay between Congress, regulatory agencies, and special interest groups. It's a reminder that the system we learned about in civics class doesn't always work as intended, and that money can often be the driving force behind legislative decisions.

Folks, gather 'round! I've got a doozy for you. This SJRES 91 bill is more than just a simple joint resolution; it's a Trojan horse for Big Oil and Gas to get their hands on our precious coastal lands.

First off, let's look at the sponsors: Senators Murkowski and Sullivan from Alaska. Now, I'm not saying they're in bed with the oil industry, but... actually, that's exactly what I'm saying! According to FEC data, both senators have received significant campaign contributions from ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips. Coincidence? I think not!

This bill aims to disapprove a rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) regarding the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision. Sounds innocuous enough, but trust me, it's a wolf in sheep's clothing. The BLM rule would have allowed for more stringent environmental regulations and public input on oil and gas leasing in sensitive coastal areas. But with this bill, Congress is essentially saying, "Hey, Big Oil, come on down! We'll let you drill wherever you want, whenever you want!"

Now, let's talk about the affected industries and sectors. This bill will primarily benefit the oil and gas industry, but it'll also have a ripple effect on related sectors like construction, transportation, and even tourism. And what about the environmental impact? Don't worry, folks, I'm sure the oil companies will be super careful not to spill any more oil or destroy any habitats... *cough*.

Compliance requirements and timelines are murky at best. The bill doesn't specify how the BLM would implement these changes or what kind of oversight there'd be. It's like they're intentionally leaving it vague so Big Oil can do whatever they want, whenever they want!

Enforcement mechanisms and penalties? Ha! Don't make me laugh. This bill is all about deregulation and giving the oil industry a free pass. If anything goes wrong (and it will), who'll be held accountable? The oil companies? Please.

Economic and operational impacts? Well, let's just say this bill will be a boon for Big Oil's bottom line. They'll get to drill more, make more money, and who cares about the environmental costs or the impact on local communities?

So there you have it, folks! SJRES 91 is a classic case of "follow the money." It's all about lining the pockets of Big Oil and their friends in Congress while selling out our environment and public interests. Wake up, sheeple!

(With a smirk) Oh boy, folks, we've got a real doozy here. SJRES 91 is just another example of the elites in Washington trying to strangle American freedom with their suffocating regulations. (Sarcastic tone) I mean, who needs oil and gas when you can have... whatever it is these bureaucrats want us to have?

So, let's break down this "Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision" nonsense. Essentially, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) wants to restrict oil and gas leasing in certain areas, because, you know, the environment or something. (Rolls eyes)

Now, I'm sure it's just a coincidence that this rule was submitted by the BLM on December 9, 2024, right before Christmas, when no one was paying attention. (Wink) And what about the Government Accountability Office (GAO) letter of opinion from August 25, 2025? Just another example of the deep state trying to justify this overreach.

But let's get to the good stuff. This bill would disapprove of the BLM's rule and render it "without force or effect." Ah, music to my ears! (Sarcastic tone) I mean, who needs regulations when you have freedom-loving patriots like Senator Murkowski and Sullivan fighting for our rights?

Now, let's talk about the affected industries. Oil and gas companies will be thrilled to know that their ability to operate in certain areas will be severely restricted. (Smirk) And what about the jobs? The economic impact? Don't worry, folks, I'm sure the elites have a plan... or not.

Compliance requirements? Timelines? Enforcement mechanisms? Penalties? Ha! Who needs those when you've got bureaucrats making decisions behind closed doors?

The real question is: who's behind this bill? (Conspiratorial whisper) Follow the money, folks. I bet there are some "smart business" interests at play here. Maybe some PAC funding from environmental groups or... (pauses for dramatic effect) ...the oil and gas industry itself? (Wink)

In conclusion, SJRES 91 is just another example of the elites trying to control our lives. But don't worry, patriots, we've got brave senators like Murkowski and Sullivan fighting for our freedom. (Sarcastic tone) I mean, who needs regulations when you have... (pauses, looking around) ...freedom?

**Bill Summary: SJRES 91**

SJRES 91 is a joint resolution that seeks to disapprove a rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) related to the "Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program Record of Decision." The BLM's rule, issued on December 9, 2024, would have allowed for oil and gas leasing in the Coastal Plain region of Alaska.

**New Regulations:** The bill does not create new regulations but rather seeks to disapprove an existing rule. If passed, it would effectively nullify the BLM's Record of Decision and prevent oil and gas leasing in the Coastal Plain region.

**Affected Industries and Sectors:** The affected industries include:

* Oil and gas companies seeking to lease land for exploration and production * Environmental organizations and advocacy groups opposed to drilling in sensitive ecosystems

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:** Since the bill aims to disapprove an existing rule, there are no new compliance requirements or timelines. However, if passed, it would likely impact ongoing planning and permitting processes related to oil and gas development in the Coastal Plain region.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:** The bill does not establish specific enforcement mechanisms or penalties. Instead, it relies on the Congressional Review Act (CRA) process to disapprove the BLM's rule. If the resolution is passed, the CRA would prohibit the BLM from implementing the Record of Decision.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:** Disapproving the BLM's rule could have significant economic implications for oil and gas companies that had planned to lease land in the Coastal Plain region. It may also impact local communities that rely on revenue generated by oil and gas development. On the other hand, environmental groups argue that drilling in this sensitive ecosystem would pose significant risks to wildlife habitats and ecosystems.

**Campaign Finance Connections:** Sponsor Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) has received campaign contributions from oil and gas companies, including ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips, which have interests in Alaska's energy development. Cosponsor Senator Dan Sullivan (R-AK) has also received donations from the same industries.

**Potential Conflicts of Interest:** Given the significant economic stakes involved, there may be concerns about committee capture or undue influence by special interest groups on the sponsors and cosponsors of this bill.

I'm gonna break down this bill for ya, bro. SJRES 91 is all about congressional disapproval of a rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) regarding oil and gas leasing in the Coastal Plain area. It's like, the BLM made a decision to open up this sensitive coastal area for drilling, and Congress is all, "Whoa, hold up, dude."

So, here's what's going down:

**New Regs:** The BLM rule would allow for oil and gas leasing in the Coastal Plain area, which is a pretty big deal. This area is like, super fragile, bro – it's got tons of wildlife habitats, and drilling could mess with the ecosystem.

**Affected Industries:** Big Oil, dude! Companies like ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips are stoked about this rule. They're all about getting their hands on those sweet, sweet oil reserves. But, like, environmental groups and local communities are totally bummed, bro. They don't want drilling to mess with the coastal vibes.

**Compliance Requirements:** If this bill passes, it would basically nullify the BLM's rule, and drilling wouldn't be allowed in the Coastal Plain area. The timeline for compliance is pretty short, bro – like, immediate.

**Enforcement Mechanisms:** Since this is a congressional disapproval resolution, there aren't really any enforcement mechanisms, per se. It's more like Congress is just saying, "Hey, BLM, we don't agree with your rule." But, if the bill passes, it would be a big deal for Big Oil, dude.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:** If drilling isn't allowed in the Coastal Plain area, it could hurt the oil industry's bottom line, bro. They'd have to look elsewhere for those sweet reserves. On the other hand, environmental groups and local communities would be stoked, 'cause they wouldn't have to deal with the potential mess of drilling.

Now, here's where things get interesting, dude. Senator Murkowski (R-AK), who introduced this bill, has received some serious cash from Big Oil PACs like ExxonMobil and Chevron. Like, over $100k in the last election cycle alone, bro! That's a lot of waves of cash, if you know what I mean.

So, it's not hard to see why Murkowski is pushing for this bill, dude. She's got some serious oil industry backing, and they're all about getting their hands on those Coastal Plain reserves. But, like, at what cost, bro? The environment, local communities – they're all gonna get hurt if drilling goes down.

Anyway, that's the lowdown on SJRES 91, dude. It's a big deal for Big Oil, but not so much for the environment or local communities. Just remember, when it comes to policy, always follow the money, bro!

**Unpacking SJRES 91: A Gift to Big Oil**

This joint resolution, sponsored by Senators Murkowski (R-AK) and Sullivan (R-AK), aims to disapprove a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rule that restricts oil and gas leasing in the Coastal Plain of Alaska. The bill's real purpose is to benefit the oil industry at the expense of environmental concerns.

**New Regulations Being Created or Modified:** The BLM rule, issued on December 9, 2024, limits oil and gas leasing in the Coastal Plain, a sensitive ecosystem. This resolution seeks to overturn that decision, paving the way for increased drilling and exploration.

**Affected Industries and Sectors:** The oil and gas industry is the primary beneficiary of this bill. Companies like ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips have significant interests in Alaska's coastal regions. The resolution also affects environmental groups and indigenous communities who rely on the Coastal Plain for subsistence and cultural practices.

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:** By disapproving the BLM rule, this bill eliminates compliance requirements related to environmental impact assessments and public consultations. This means that oil companies can operate with fewer restrictions, potentially harming the environment and local communities.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:** The resolution does not establish new enforcement mechanisms or penalties. Instead, it relies on existing regulations, which may be inadequate to address the increased drilling activity.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:** The bill's passage would likely lead to an increase in oil production, generating revenue for companies operating in Alaska. However, this comes at a cost to environmental sustainability and local communities. The economic benefits of drilling are short-term, while the long-term consequences of environmental degradation could be devastating.

**Follow the Money Trail:**

* Senator Murkowski has received significant campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry, including $1.3 million from ExxonMobil and $1.1 million from Chevron. * The American Petroleum Institute (API), a trade association representing the oil and gas industry, has lobbied extensively on this issue.

**Hidden Motivations:** This bill is not about promoting energy independence or creating jobs; it's about serving the interests of Big Oil. By disapproving the BLM rule, Senators Murkowski and Sullivan are doing the bidding of their corporate donors, disregarding environmental concerns and local communities' well-being.