The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
S. 1486·119th Congress·Introduced Apr 10, 2025

COAST Anti-Drilling Act of 2025

IntroducedEnergyMajor
View bill text
Sponsor
Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ]
Committees
Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
Last action
Apr 10, 2025

Bottom line

This bill establishes a permanent federal prohibition on offshore oil and gas drilling in designated Atlantic and Florida coastal waters, aiming to protect marine environments and coastal economies from potential impacts of energy exploration.

What it actually does

This bill amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to permanently ban new oil, natural gas, and other mineral leasing and drilling authorizations in the North Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Straits of Florida planning areas. It specifically references the 2024-2029 National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Final Program to define these areas, ensuring a permanent prohibition on offshore drilling activities in these regions.

Proponents argue

Proponents argue that permanent protection of these coastal areas from offshore drilling is crucial for safeguarding marine ecosystems, supporting coastal tourism and fishing industries, and mitigating climate change by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. They emphasize the risks of oil spills and the long-term economic benefits of a healthy ocean.

Opponents contend

Opponents might argue that such a prohibition unnecessarily restricts domestic energy production, potentially increasing reliance on foreign oil and gas, and could lead to higher energy costs for consumers. They may also contend that modern drilling technologies are safe and that these areas could contribute to energy independence and job creation.

The bill is very short and clear, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core purpose quickly.

Section 2, amending Section 8 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1337)

Permanent Prohibition on Offshore Drilling in Atlantic and Florida Planning Areas

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section adds a new subsection (q) to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which legally prevents the Secretary of the Interior from issuing any new leases or permits for exploring, developing, or producing oil, natural gas, or other minerals. This ban applies specifically to the North Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Straits of Florida planning areas, as defined by a recent federal program, thereby establishing a permanent moratorium on offshore drilling activities in these regions.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupCoastal communities (tourism, fishing industries)ImpactPositive (protection from environmental risks, preservation of natural resources)MechanismElimination of potential oil spills and industrialization of coastal waters.ScaleRegional (Atlantic coast states from Florida to Maine).
GroupEnvironmental conservation organizationsImpactPositive (achievement of conservation goals)MechanismLegal protection of marine ecosystems from drilling impacts.ScaleNational.
GroupOil and gas industryImpactNegative (loss of potential exploration and production areas)MechanismLegal prohibition on access to specific OCS areas.ScaleRegional (companies interested in Atlantic exploration).
GroupEnergy consumersImpactPotentially negative (if domestic supply is constrained, leading to higher prices) or neutral (if alternative sources compensate).MechanismReduced domestic supply from these specific areas.ScaleNational.

Supporters argue

Supporters argue this provision is essential for protecting fragile marine environments, preventing catastrophic oil spills, and preserving the economic vitality of coastal communities that rely on tourism and fishing. They highlight the long-term benefits of transitioning to cleaner energy sources and safeguarding natural heritage.

Critics contend

Critics contend that this permanent ban removes significant potential domestic energy resources from consideration, hindering energy independence and potentially increasing consumer costs. They argue that modern drilling techniques are safe and that the economic benefits of resource extraction, including jobs and revenue, would be forgone.

Tradeoffs

The provision balances environmental protection and the economic interests of coastal communities (tourism, fishing) against the potential for domestic energy production, energy independence, and associated industry jobs and revenue. It also reflects a tension between fossil fuel extraction and climate change mitigation goals.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
  • Implementation
  • Political analysis
Ask Ledger AI about this