US Federal House Bill HR951

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 12/16/25

Caption

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4776) to amend the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to clarify ambiguous provisions and facilitate a more efficient, effective, and timely environmental review process; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1366) to provide for the location of multiple hardrock mining mill sites, to establish the Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fund, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 845) to require the Secretary of the Interior to reissue regulations removing the gray wolf from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife under the Endangered Species Act of 1973; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3616) to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to review regulations that may affect the reliable operation of the bulk-power system; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3632) to amend the Federal Power Act to adjust the requirements for orders, rules, and regulations relating to furnishing adequate service, to require owners or operators of generating facilities to provide notice of planned retirements of certain electric generating units, and for other purposes; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4371) to amend the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to enhance efforts to combat the trafficking of children.

Summary

H. Res. 951 is a House rules resolution that sets the terms for floor consideration of six separate bills. It does not itself change substantive law; instead, it authorizes debate, waives certain points of order, and structures amendment procedures for measures dealing with environmental review under NEPA, hardrock mining and abandoned mine cleanup, gray wolf delisting under the Endangered Species Act, electric grid reliability and power plant retirement notices, and child trafficking enforcement. The resolution provides that the House may consider each bill under specified debate limits and amendment rules, including automatic adoption of committee-recommended substitutes for several of the bills and restrictions on further amendments. In practical terms, its effect is procedural: it advances the legislative process for the underlying policy bills and determines how tightly controlled their floor debate and amendment opportunities will be. The voting history suggests the resolution was supported by a narrow majority but faced substantial opposition. The House agreed to the previous question by 214-206 and adopted the resolution by 214-208, indicating a closely divided chamber and a partisan or issue-based split over whether and how these bills should be brought to the floor. Because H. Res. 951 is a rulemaking resolution, the main points of contention are not the resolution’s own text but the underlying policy bills it packages together. Likely areas of disagreement include environmental permitting reform, mining policy and abandoned mine funding, gray wolf management and endangered species protections, federal oversight of electric reliability, and anti-trafficking measures. The structure of the rule itself may also have drawn criticism from members who opposed limiting amendments or waiving procedural objections.

Impact

H. Res. 951 affects House procedure rather than state law or federal substantive law directly. Its impact is to govern consideration of six separate bills by waiving points of order, setting debate time, and controlling amendments, thereby shaping whether and how those measures can advance. Any changes to state or federal law would come only if the underlying bills are later enacted; this resolution itself does not amend the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Federal Power Act, or trafficking statutes.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment appears mixed to negative along partisan lines, with the resolution passing narrowly in a closely divided House. Supporters likely viewed it as an efficient way to move a package of committee-backed bills to the floor, while opponents likely objected to the closed or structured rule and to the policy direction of the underlying measures. The vote totals show meaningful resistance, suggesting the package was controversial even though it ultimately advanced.

Contention

The main contention centers on the underlying bills and on the procedural choice to bundle them under a structured rule. Environmental groups and some lawmakers may oppose NEPA streamlining, hardrock mining expansion, and gray wolf delisting, while others support those measures as pro-development or state-management reforms. Energy reliability provisions may divide members over federal regulation of the grid and power plant retirement notice requirements. The trafficking bill is likely less controversial substantively, but the rule’s limitation on amendments and the inclusion of multiple unrelated bills in one resolution may have drawn procedural criticism from members seeking more open debate.