After 40 years, the U.S. House of Representatives is considering a bill on the floor to lift the ban on exporting crude oil from the U.S. Implemented during the Arab oil embargo in the 1970s, the export ban has turned into a controversial issue with the U.S. becoming the largest producer of oil after Saudi Arabia in recent years.

Massive price gaps between U.S. crude oil prices and the world market have allowed refineries to rein in enormous profit margins (as of February 2014, West Texas benchmark being as much as $30 a barrel cheaper than its international counterpart Brent).

Last year, the Commerce Department lifted restrictions for certain U.S. companies to export a type of ultralight oil, also called condensate, allowing the first exports of unrefined oil in more than 40 years. The U.S. also exports crude oil to Canada and recently announced a decision to introduce crude oil export swaps with Mexico.

The possible impacts of lifting the ban have been assessed repeatedly. A recent report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration concludes that crude oil exports would not increase U.S. gasoline prices and might even reduce them, given the current oversupply on the world markets. "Petroleum product prices in the United States, including gasoline prices, would be either unchanged or slightly reduced by the removal of current restrictions on crude oil exports," the report reads.

The report also states that domestic refiners would remain competitive compared to foreign competitors. On the other hand, it forecasts that the lift of the ban might do little to boost domestic production — the hope of many proponents of the bill.

A recent statement by the Center for American Progress (CAP) draws a much gloomier picture, criticizing research like the one by the EIA that lifting the ban could enhance U.S. energy security and benefit domestic interests. The statement argues that "the economic, national security and environmental impacts of changing long-standing U.S. crude oil policy are neither well documented nor well understood" which was criticized by Charles Ebinger and Heather Greenley of the U.S.-based Brookings Institute as being devoid of reality and misses "rigorous modelling data."

Will the bill pass and become law? Not likely.

The bill is mostly supported by Republicans, while the White House officially declared Sept. 15 that it won't back it. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest stated: "We've got a position on this, which is this is a policy decision made over at the Commerce Department, and for that reason we wouldn't support legislation like the one that has been put forward by Republicans."

Earnest added that House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) should instead push to "end billions in subsidies that oil and gas companies in the U.S. already enjoy."