Highlights
- The United States is severely dependent on China for rare earth elements and critical minerals due to outdated mining laws and bureaucratic inefficiencies.
- Multiple federal agencies create contradictory regulations that make domestic rare earth mining and processing extremely difficult to develop and scale.
- Urgent action is needed to streamline permitting, restore mining expertise, and create a unified national strategy for critical mineral development.
The United States is at a strategic crossroads when it comes to rare earth elements (REEs) and critical minerals—materials essential for national security, clean energy, and advanced manufacturing. Despite growing demand, America remains overly dependent on China for processing and supply, putting the nation at a severe disadvantage in geopolitical and economic competition. Why? Because the U.S. federal government has created an overlapping maze of conflicting laws, regulations, and policies that make domestic rare earth mining and processing nearly impossible to scale.
The failure to establish a cohesive national strategy stem from years of legislative stagnation, bureaucratic inefficiency, and budget cuts that have eroded mining expertise within the government. The result? America’s ability to secure its supply chain is crippled by regulatory paralysis, while adversaries like China continue to dominate the global market.
While the current administration continues to implement what some would consider revolutionary changes within the U.S. federal government, it’s not clear if this will positively impact the significant shortfall in rare earth and critical mineral supply chain resilience.
The Overlapping and Conflicting Laws Governing U.S. Rare Earth Mining
First, antiquated mining laws stifle development. The 1872 Mining Law, (opens in a new tab) still the backbone of American mining policy, was designed for gold and silver prospectors of the 19th century, not for strategic rare earth elements crucial for 21st-century technology.
This outdated framework fails to address modern permitting complexities, land use disputes, andenvironmental requirements, leaving mining companies stuck in endlesslegal battles just to start a project.
Unlike China, which has a state-coordinated mining strategy, U.S. miners must navigate decades-old policies that offer no streamlined pathway for rare earth projects. Moreover, permitting a new mine in the U.S. can take several years— compared to 2–3 years in China—due to excessive federal, state, and local regulatory hurdles.
And what about environmental laws and bureaucracy creating endless delays?
While environmental protection is necessary, U.S. regulations on rare earth mining contradict themselves and discourage investment rather than ensure responsible development. A multiplicity of statues is involved. Take the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires years-long reviews that often result in lawsuits and delay projects indefinitely. Then there is the Clean Water Act & Endangered Species Act (opens in a new tab), with federal agencies often conflicting with each other over mining approvals, forcing companies to comply with overlapping or contradictory rules from EPA, Fish & Wildlife, and the Army Corps of Engineers.
Then, there are bureaucratic redundancies that slow actions down. Mining projects could require approvals from multiple agencies (BLM, USGS, DOE, DOI, DOD, EPA, and state governments)—each with different timelines and priorities.
Another complication are national security laws vs. domestic policy gaps. Congress has recognized the national security risk of relying on China for critical minerals, yet federal policy does little to fix the domestic production problem as Rare Earth Exchanges has chronicled since our media site launch last October.
Take the Defense Production Act (opens in a new tab) (DPA) for example, which allows the government to fund rare earth projects, but these efforts are mostly piecemeal and slow due to bureaucratic hurdles. Then there is the Inflation Reduction Act (opens in a new tab) (IRA) and CHIPS Act (opens in a new tab) under previous President Biden, providing funding for domestic supply chains, but unfortunately, lack a clear strategy to link mining, refining, and manufacturing into a coherent system. President Trump’s recent moves to attempt to scrap the CHIP Act have created panic, according to the New York Times.
Then, there are contradictory federal policies. While the DOE and DOD push for domestic mining, agencies like the EPA and DOI slow-walk permits and impose excessive restrictions, blocking the very projects the government says it needs. If President Trump is taking rare earth and critical mineral supply chain resilience seriously why are these matters not being addressed in a more proactive and public way?
Failed Attempts at Lawmaking
The proposed Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Acts from 2007 through 2017 sought to modernize the outdated 1872 General Mining Law by imposing royalties on mining operations, establishing environmental protection funds, and strengthening oversight of reclamation efforts.
These bills aimed to address key issues such as the lack of royalties paid by mining companies for extracting minerals from public lands, the environmental impact of abandoned mines, and the financial responsibility of operators for remediation costs. While each successive bill built upon prior legislative attempts, they varied in the specifics of royalty rates, maintenance fees, and environmental safeguards. Key features included royalty rates ranging from 2% to 15% of mining production, the creation of cleanup funds for abandoned mines, and stricter regulations for mining operations on federal lands.
Despite the urgency to reform mining laws, none of these bills passed due to a combination of political opposition, industry resistance, and shifting legislative priorities. The mining industry and its advocates opposed the bills, arguing that the proposed royalty rates would make U.S. mining less competitive globally, particularly in critical mineral extraction.
Additionally, the lack of bipartisan support, particularly from lawmakers representing mining-heavy states like Nevada, stalled progress. Broader legislative priorities, such as economic policy and healthcare reform, also diverted congressional attention away from mining law modernization. The repeated failure of these bills underscores the challenge of balancing economic interests with environmental responsibility in U.S. mining policy.
How the Government Lost Touch with Mining Expertise
For decades, the U.S. Geological Survey (opens in a new tab) (USGS) and Bureau of Mines (opens in a new tab) were at the forefront of understanding America’s mineral resources. However, due to chronic budget cuts and policy neglect, the government’s mining expertise has eroded to the point where agencies lack the knowledge to make informed decisions on rare earth and critical mineral policy.
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has experienced the following budget allocations and proposals for fiscal years 2024 and 2025:
Fiscal Year 2024:
- President’s Budget Request–the administration proposed a budget of $1.786 billion for the USGS, representing an increase of $288 million over the FY 2023 enacted budget.
- Congressional Appropriations: The actual appropriations for FY 2024 amounted to $1.455 billion, which is $330.1 million below the President’s request and $41.7 million less than the FY 2023 enacted level.
Fiscal Year 2025:
- President’s Budget Request: For FY 2025, the administration has proposed a budget of $1.578 billion for the USGS, marking an increase of $122.9 million over the FY 2024 appropriations.
It’s important to note that the President’s budget request outlines the administration’s funding priorities and proposals. However, Congress determines the actual appropriations through the legislative process and may differ from the proposed amounts.
For today’s reality—of overwhelming dependence on China, is the USGS budget anywhere near enough?
Then the Bureau of Mines was shut down in 1996, leaving the U.S. without a dedicated agency to oversee mining and materials research! And USGS funding for mineral resource assessments has declined, meaning the government has no real-time understanding of domestic reserves.
Federal workforce shortages in mining and metallurgy have led to the outsourcing of key assessments, forcing decision-makers to rely on private consultants and foreign reports—often from China.
Without in-house expertise, U.S. policymakers are making crucial decisions about mining without the scientific or economic knowledge necessary to compete globally.
The Urgent Need for a Unified and Streamlined U.S. Strategy America’s rare earth and critical mineral policy is broken, but solutions exist. Rare Earth Exchanges has suggested the current POTUS establish a Critical Minerals Czar to plan for the streamlining of laws rules and policies for more efficient and effective outcomes.
Yes, the government must stop working against itself and take bold action to streamline laws and regulations that have made domestic mining a bureaucratic nightmare.
What are some ideas to consider?
| Actions to Consider | Summary |
|---|---|
| Create a National Rare Earth & Critical Minerals Authority—A Czar |
|
| Streamline Permitting to Match Global Competitors |
|
| Restore Mining Expertise in the Federal Government |
|
| Remove Contradictions in National Security and Environmental Policy |
|
Also, research and development into innovation and transformational technologies and processes need imminent support. The development of non-rare earth approaches (e.g., non-rare earth magnets) to rare earth recycling technologies can help transform the dependence on China over time.
The Time for Action is Now
The U.S. is losing the global race for rare earths and critical minerals because of dysfunctional laws, excessive bureaucracy, and a loss of mining expertise. Yes, we are all environmentalists and understand the need for balanced stewardship of the land while mindful of the imminent calling of the times.
China, Australia, and Canada have clear national strategies, while America remains stuck in legal and regulatory paralysis.
If the federal government does not act decisively, the country will continue to be at the mercy of foreign suppliers, undermining economic security, military readiness, and technological competitiveness.
The U.S. must streamline its approach now or risk becoming permanently dependent on adversaries for the resources that power the future. The clock is ticking. Will Washington wake up before it’s too late?
Leave a Reply