House Democrats on Thursday lost a critical vote on forcing oil and gas companies to “use or lose” the lands they have leased from the federal government, failing for a second time to get the two-thirds majority necessary to pass the measure under suspension of the rules.

But Democrats were able to garner much more Republican support this time, while limiting the number of defectors in their own party to 11.

“We’re keeping the pressure on. Things are moving in the right direction,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) just before a post-vote press conference.

“The message is gaining traction,” Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel added.

Still, the vote on the Drill Responsibly in Leased Lands Act — which was 244-173 — failed to amass a two-thirds majority.

Republicans accused Democrats of again playing political games, saying the use of the suspension calendar was “all lip service, no leadership.”

"Another week has come and gone without the Democrat Congress taking action to lower gas prices,” Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam (R-Fla.) said in a statement. While Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) “insists on pursuing a purely political strategy on the floor of the House of Representatives, record gas prices continue to soak family budgets and leave municipalities in dire straits,” Putnam said.

In addition to requiring energy companies to either drill on 68 million acres of approved and leased lands or vacate their leases, the new Drill Act also included language to speed up the leasing of 20 million acres in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, to reconstitute the ban on the foreign export of Alaskan oil and to urge the president to facilitate the completion of oil and gas pipelines from Alaska.

Democrats were hoping the additional provisions would encourage more of their own members and more Republicans to vote for the measure, a strategy that appeared to have worked. Twenty-six Republicans joined 218 Democrats in voting for the Drill Act, while 11 Democrats joined 162 Republicans in voting against it.

However, the parties remained deeply divided — at least, according to another week’s worth of rhetoric — on how to bring down gas prices.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) had said on Wednesday that his conference was for the “sweeteners,” but vehemently against the “use it or lose it” language, which he called a hoax.

The first “use it or lose it” bill was brought up on June 26, the last day before the July 4 recess. It fell 56 votes short of the two-thirds necessary for its passage on the suspension calendar. Nineteen Democrats — many from oil-producing states — voted against the first bill. Eleven Republicans voted for it.

Thursday’s vote was also the second time that “use it or lose it” would have passed under regular order requiring a simple majority.

Republicans — along with a few Democrats, including Rep. Gene Green (Texas) — said Democrats were bringing the bill up under suspension of the rules to avoid a Republican vote on the opening of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and protected areas of the Outer Continental Shelf to drilling.

Before Thursday’s vote, Green said he believed such a vote “would be close.”

Democrats denied those charges, saying their “use it or lose it” bills were about drilling in areas that can be tapped the fastest.

“Well, we’re talking about drilling here,” Pelosi told reporters Thursday morning. “So for the president to say — as he tried to represent but had to back off his own statement — that, but for drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, the price at the pump would be lower, is a complete hoax.

“There are easier ways to go that are already approved, and time is of the essence,” Pelosi said.

Pelosi and other Democratic leaders also immediately turned their attention to their strategy for next week, which could include another attempt at passing "use it or lose it," as well as a bill to require the President to release as much at 10 percent of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and a bill to curb excessive oil market speculation.

Asked if any of those measures will also be placed on the suspension calender, Van Hollen said: "It's very possible they will be. But no final decisions have been made."