Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4690) to amend the Energy Conservation and Production Act to repeal certain Federal building energy efficiency performance standards, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 1182) expressing support for rural communities across the United States as stewards of the environment, major suppliers of United States energy resources, critical providers of food production and manufacturing capacity, and drivers of national economic stability, and recognizing the work of the House of Representatives in the 119th Congress in support of those vital communities; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1897) to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to optimize conservation through resource prioritization, incentivize wildlife conservation on private lands, provide for greater incentives to recover listed species, create greater transparency and accountability in recovering listed species, streamline the permitting process, eliminate barriers to conservation, and restore congressional intent; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5587) to amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to waive the requirement for a Federal drilling permit for certain activities, to exempt certain activities from the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and for other purposes.
Introduced April 20, 2026 · Last action April 22, 2026
Plain English Summary
This resolution is a procedural measure that allows the House to consider three bills: H.R. 4690 (repealing federal building energy efficiency standards), H.R. 1897 (amending the Endangered Species Act to streamline permitting and prioritize conservation spending), and H.R. 5587 (exempting geothermal drilling from federal permit requirements and environmental review). The resolution waives points of order and expedites debate on all three bills.
Who benefits
Oil and gas companies pursuing geothermal drilling (H.R. 5587); building developers and real estate owners avoiding federal energy efficiency compliance costs (H.R. 4690); energy extraction companies on federal and private lands (H.R. 1897 through streamlined permitting); rural landowners and agricultural operations with wildlife on their property (H.R. 1897 through incentivized conservation); construction firms and manufacturers avoiding regulatory overhead (implicit in energy deregulation provisions).
Who pays / loses
Renewable energy developers competing against geothermal operators with reduced permitting burdens (H.R. 5587); building occupants and property owners in heated/cooled buildings facing higher energy costs if efficiency standards are eliminated (H.R. 4690); species listed under the Endangered Species Act facing reduced protection if conservation resources are redirected toward higher-priority species (H.R. 1897); environmental review processes and public notice opportunities reduced under NEPA exemptions (H.R. 5587); federal agencies losing permitting authority and cost-recovery mechanisms.
Funding & Lobbying Interests
The sponsor, Rep. Roy (R-TX-21), received $146,768.66 in 'Other' contributions in the 2024 cycle and $5,150 from energy industry donors, with no disclosed PAC contributions. Energy companies (oil, gas, and geothermal operators) have direct financial interest in H.R. 5587's drilling permit waivers and H.R. 4690's elimination of building efficiency standards, which reduce operational costs and regulatory compliance. Construction and real estate industries benefit from eliminating building code compliance costs. Agricultural interests benefit from H.R. 1897's private-land conservation incentives. Geothermal drilling operators and oil/gas companies leasing federal lands are primary financial beneficiaries.
Political Impact
Affected Groups
Geothermal energy companies and their employees in western states (direct benefit from H.R. 5587); oil and gas extraction firms (indirect benefit from streamlined federal-land permitting under H.R. 1897); building construction and real estate development companies and their workers (H.R. 4690); rural landowners and agricultural operations (H.R. 1897); tenants and occupants of commercial and residential buildings relying on energy efficiency standards (negative impact from H.R. 4690); endangered and threatened species populations in prioritized conservation zones and those de-prioritized under new allocation schemes (H.R. 1897); federal and tribal lands facing increased extraction activity (H.R. 5587).
Political Subtext
Proponents argue this streamlines energy development, reduces regulatory burden on businesses and rural landowners, and modernizes conservation policy to focus resources on achievable recovery targets. Critics contend it weakens environmental oversight, reduces species protections, increases energy consumption and costs for consumers, and exempts profitable industries from permitting and environmental review requirements designed to prevent public harm. Non-partisan evidence on building efficiency standards (from the Department of Energy and industry analyses) shows mandatory standards reduce long-term energy costs for occupants despite higher upfront construction costs; eliminating them shifts costs to future building users. The Endangered Species Act's track record (per U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service data) shows prioritization of well-funded recovery programs produces measurable species recovery, while de-prioritization correlates with slower recovery timelines. NEPA exemptions (per GAO reviews of similar exemptions) reduce public transparency and cost-shifting of environmental externalities to non-industry stakeholders.
Real-World Stakes
If passed: (1) H.R. 4690 eliminates federal incentives for energy-efficient building design, likely increasing long-term energy consumption and operating costs for building owners and tenants; analogous state-level deregulation (e.g., some states rolling back efficiency codes in the 1990s) led to 15-25% higher energy intensity in buildings compared to code-compliant peers (per Department of Energy analysis). (2) H.R. 5587 waives drilling permits and NEPA review for geothermal operations, reducing public comment periods and environmental baseline studies; similar NEPA exemptions for energy projects (e.g., certain oil/gas leases under the Energy Policy Act of 2005) accelerated permitting by 12-18 months but eliminated impact assessments, resulting in unanticipated groundwater contamination in some cases (per Bureau of Land Management incident reports). (3) H.R. 1897 restructures Endangered Species Act enforcement; shifting conservation resources toward 'high-priority' species based on cost-benefit analysis may accelerate recovery of commercially valuable species (e.g., bald eagle, gray wolf) while de-prioritizing endemic or geographically isolated species with lower political support, consistent with conservation ecology literature on species prioritization tradeoffs.
Sponsor
Vote Record
No recorded votes.
Campaign Finance — Primary Sponsor
Top contributing industries
Other$146,768.66
Finance$14,385
Construction$8,133.5
Agriculture$6,660
Energy$5,150
501(c)(4) disclosure: Contributions from 501(c)(4) "dark money" organizations are not required to be publicly disclosed and are not reflected in the figures above. Data sourced from FEC public disclosure filings.
Community Discussion
Share this bill
Sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first.