View the interactive network in Queen Street Analytics →

Each quarter we track movements in US federal lobbying, channel by channel. This edition covers Mining for Q2 of 2026, ranking the organizations, government entities, issues, and lobbyists whose disclosed spend moved most.

Central Themes in this Quarter’s Lobby Data

Federal Permitting Timelines Cut Dramatically under SPEED Act

Recent legislative reform has set new deadlines for mining project reviews, significantly shortening NEPA timelines from the traditional 7-10 years down to 3-5 years in most cases. This coincides with a surge in lobbying referencing permitting reform and environmental review, with sector actors such as the National Mining Assn, which lobbied the Executive Office of the President and the House of Representatives, as well as ioneer USA, which engaged with the Dept of Energy and the Dept of Defense, seeking to capitalize on the new, streamlined process.

📎 mining permits reform 2026 - skillings.net · SME warns 2026 may reset US mining’s global role · US Mining Sector 2026 Outlook: Policy Shifts, Permitting Reform & Rare ...

Federal Procurement and Investment Surge Amid Defense Priorities

Heightened federal backing for defense-critical minerals has brought new procurement programs and financing mechanisms, including approximately $1 billion in new federal funds. Mining sector lobbying, such as efforts by National Mining Assn with the Senate and Dept of Energy, and Eclipse Metals LTD. with the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), focusing on critical minerals and rare element supply chains aligns closely with these expanded government initiatives.

📎 USA Mining 2026 – GBR – Global Business Reports · Critical Minerals Snapshot – Key Takeaways from 2026 so far… · 2026 Mining and Metals Industry Outlook - Deloitte

Executive and Judicial Actions Expedite Project Approvals

A flurry of executive orders, paired with a significant Supreme Court ruling, is accelerating mining project approvals and reducing environmental review complexity. These events are referenced directly in lobbying filings by the National Mining Assn and ioneer USA before the Executive Office of the President (EOP), Department of the Interior (DOI), and Department of Energy, tied to permitting reform, access to federal lands, and expansion of critical mineral processing.

📎 SME warns 2026 may reset US mining’s global role · US Mining Sector 2026 Outlook: Policy Shifts, Permitting Reform & Rare ... · Mining permits reform 2026: what changed and impact on US projects

Federal Support Grows for Non-Rare-Earth Critical Minerals

There has been a notable governmental pivot toward strategic minerals like antimony, tungsten, and graphite, complementing established focus on rare earths. Lobbying clients such as Iperionx Critical Minerals, engaging with the Dept of Defense, the Executive Office of the President, and the House of Representatives, have notably referenced these policy shifts while advocating for supply chain resilience, reflecting expanded federal interest in diversifying mineral sourcing.

📎 How 2026 will reshape US critical minerals resilience · mining permits reform 2026 - skillings.net · Critical Minerals Snapshot – Key Takeaways from 2026 so far…

Trade Rules Tightened for Mining Projects

More stringent trade and supply chain requirements appear to be impacting federal endorsement of domestic mining initiatives, as highlighted by recent lobbying from the National Mining Assn and Iperionx Critical Minerals to the House of Representatives, the Executive Office of the President, and the Intl Trade Administration (ITA). Recent lobbying described concerns over foreign supply risks and traceability mandates, reflecting new federal rules privileging 'trusted sources' and projects strengthening domestic supply chains.

📎 USA Mining 2026 – GBR – Global Business Reports · Mining permits reform 2026: what changed and impact on US projects · 2026 Mining and Metals Industry Outlook - Deloitte

Section A: Lobbying Spend by Industry

How much each industry in this channel spent on federal lobbying in Q2 of 2026, compared with its average over the prior six quarters.

In Q2 of 2026, there was $10.0M worth of disclosed lobbying activity on Mining, roughly in line with the recent quarterly average of $11.1M. This activity can be broken down by industry as follows:

↳ There was $5.9M worth of Metal mining & processing lobbying, 19% lower than the recent quarterly average of $7.3M.

↳ There was $2.5M worth of Mining lobbying, 10% higher than the recent quarterly average of $2.3M.

↳ There was $1.1M worth of Coal mining lobbying, 27% higher than the recent quarterly average of $879k.

↳ There was $270k worth of Mining services & equipment lobbying, roughly in line with the recent quarterly average of $283k.

↳ There was $205k worth of Non-metallic mining lobbying, 38% lower than the recent quarterly average of $332k.

Section B: Lobbying Spend Trend

This channel's total disclosed lobbying spend across recent quarters, aggregated over all of its industries.

In Q2 of 2026, there was $10.0M worth of disclosed lobbying activity on Mining. Across the 10 quarters shown, the channel's total disclosed spend has risen over this period.

Organizations' Lobby Spend

The image below shows the organizations whose lobbying spend moved most from their six-quarter average.

The organizations whose spending moved most from their own recent quarterly average were as follows:

↳ Glencore LTD. accounted for $710k in disclosed lobbying, 135% higher than the recent quarterly average of $302k.

↳ Cleveland-cliffs INC. accounted for $630k in disclosed lobbying, 103% higher than the recent quarterly average of $310k.

↳ Barrick Mining Corporation (Fka Barrick Gold Corporation) accounted for $0 in disclosed lobbying, 100% lower than the recent quarterly average of $285k.

↳ Uranium Energy Corp accounted for $275k in disclosed lobbying, 1400% higher than the recent quarterly average of $18k.

↳ National Mining Assn accounted for $970k in disclosed lobbying, 34% higher than the recent quarterly average of $725k.

↳ Rio Tinto Group accounted for $90k in disclosed lobbying, 73% lower than the recent quarterly average of $332k.

Section D: Government Entities Lobbied

This section documents this quarter's most lobbied federal government departments.

By industry

The industry–entity pairings that moved most this quarter were as follows:

↳ Metal mining & processing directed $1.2M of lobbying toward House of Representatives, 26% lower than the recent quarterly average of $1.6M.

↳ Metal mining & processing directed $226k of lobbying toward Dept of State (DOS), 61% lower than the recent quarterly average of $576k.

↳ Metal mining & processing directed $1.2M of lobbying toward Senate, 21% lower than the recent quarterly average of $1.6M.

By organization

The organization–entity pairings that moved most this quarter were as follows:

↳ Us Strategic Metals directed $150k of lobbying toward Dept of Commerce (DOC), 1100% higher than the recent quarterly average of $12k.

↳ Arcelormittal Mining Uk LTD. directed $0 of lobbying toward Dept of State (DOS), 100% lower than the recent quarterly average of $115k.

↳ Uranium Energy Corp directed $78k of lobbying toward Senate, 9200% higher than the recent quarterly average of $833.

Section E: Lobbying Issues

This section documents this quarter's most lobbied-on issues.

By industry

The industry–issue pairings that moved most this quarter were as follows:

↳ Metal mining & processing put $1.8M toward lobbying on Natural Resources, 36% lower than the recent quarterly average of $2.7M.

↳ Metal mining & processing put $126k toward lobbying on Foreign Relations, 67% lower than the recent quarterly average of $380k.

↳ Metal mining & processing put $226k toward lobbying on Taxes, 46% lower than the recent quarterly average of $417k.

By organization

The organization–issue pairings that moved most this quarter were as follows:

↳ Uranium Energy Corp put $159k toward lobbying on Energy & Nuclear Power, 903% higher than the recent quarterly average of $16k.

↳ Barrick Mining Corporation (Fka Barrick Gold Corporation) put $0 toward lobbying on Taxes, 100% lower than the recent quarterly average of $141k.

↳ Arcelormittal Mining Uk LTD. put $0 toward lobbying on Foreign Relations, 100% lower than the recent quarterly average of $115k.

Section F: Most-Active Lobbyists

The figure below lists the lobbyists who managed the most imputed lobbying value this quarter, alongside their firm or organization. Because a filing's value is split evenly across the lobbyists it names, these dollar figures are imputed rather than directly disclosed.

No lobbyist activity to report this quarter.

Section G: Organization Network

The header image for this edition maps how this channel's organizations (neutral nodes) connect to the federal entities they lobbied (colored nodes) this quarter. A link's weight is the filing value directed to that entity, and node size reflects total value; the House and Senate are excluded (nearly every organization lobbies them) so the specialized targets stand out.

The most widely lobbied entity this quarter was Dept of Commerce (DOC), which was lobbied by 11 organizations.

Methodology

Every figure in this report starts from one number: the disclosed value of each lobbying filing, which we take as the income a registrant reported plus any in-house expenses (income + expenses) on its quarterly US Senate and House LDA disclosure. Before totalling anything we clean the filings — applying each amendment over the original it replaces, removing duplicates, and setting aside non-standard records such as registrations and terminations — and map every filing to a lobbying channel and industry using the organization's CRP industry code.

How the money is divided. A filing's full value counts once toward the organization that paid it and that organization's industry, so the industry and organization rankings (Sections A–C) reflect whole dollars. But a single filing usually names several government entities, several issue areas, and several lobbyists at once, and the disclosure never says how the fee was split among them. Rather than credit the full amount to each — which would count the same dollars over and over — we divide a filing's value evenly across the distinct items it names. So a $200,000 filing that lists four agencies contributes $50,000 to each in Section D, and the same even split is applied across issues in Section E and across lobbyists in Section F. That way every section's totals trace back to the same underlying money without double-counting.

Reading the movements. A “deviation” compares the quarter's value to the average of the prior six quarters, so a rise or fall is measured against an entity's own recent norm rather than against the rest of the field. Section B takes the wider view: it sums every industry into one channel total and plots it quarter by quarter, with a fitted line showing the overall direction of travel. Source: US Senate and House LDA disclosures.