Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
House hearing spotlights Lasso Act and push to channel public‑lands revenue into Social Security
Loading...
Summary
Witnesses and members debated proposals to increase resource production on federal lands and a bill, H.R. 34 (the Lasso Act), that would direct 10% of revenues from public‑lands activities to the Social Security Trust Fund.
Chairman Gosar opened a House Natural Resources Subcommittee hearing by framing the meeting as an inquiry into “the economic potential of the golden age of American energy dominance” and introduced H.R. 34, the Lasso Act, which he described as a measure to allocate 10% of revenue from activities on Department of the Interior and Forest Service lands to the Social Security Trust Fund. "What better way to have that than to go into [the] Social Security Fund?" he said.
The Lasso Act and the broader policy push to expand energy development on federal lands were presented as mutually reinforcing in testimony. Jerry Taylor, a Garfield County commissioner, told the subcommittee that counties with high shares of federal land depend on activity on those lands for jobs and local revenue; he said Garfield County has “over 90%” federally managed land and highlighted local oil, coal and timber potential. Diana Furchtgott‑Roth, director of the Heritage Foundation's Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment, framed expanded fossil‑fuel and mineral development as central to U.S. competitiveness with strategic competitors such as China and Russia.
Taxpayers for Common Sense and other witnesses pushed back on the revenue promise if oversight and leasing practices are not reformed. Autumn Hanna, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, urged modernizing leasing and oversight to ensure “fair return, competition, preventing future liabilities, and avoiding waste.” Hanna noted that gains in royalty rates and bonding enacted in 2022 were partly rolled back in subsequent legislation and argued those rollbacks shift costs to taxpayers.
The hearing did not produce formal committee action on H.R. 34. Chairman Gosar said Republicans had put forward H.R. 34 to add revenue to the Social Security trust but offered no procedural motion to advance the bill during the hearing. The subcommittee agreed, by unanimous consent, to allow additional member statements to be included in the hearing record and to hold the hearing record open for member questions submitted later.
Why it matters: H.R. 34 would change how revenues from federal lands are allocated by directing a set percentage to the Social Security trust, potentially shifting budget flows used today for states, conservation, and other federal funds. The debate at the hearing shows lawmakers and stakeholders disagree on how to balance revenue generation, local impacts, and federal oversight.
Supporting details and context: Chairman Gosar cited multiple authorities supporting multiple use on public lands, including the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). Gosar said revenue categories include fees, royalties, permits and rents, and he cited figures for recent revenue years as part of his rationale for the Lasso Act. Witnesses repeatedly returned to the practical question of whether revenues would actually increase for taxpayers without concurrent reforms to leasing, royalty collection, bonding and permitting.
