[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 42 (Wednesday, March 9, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H1394-H1405]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SUSPENDING ENERGY IMPORTS FROM RUSSIA ACT
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 973, I call up
the bill (H.R. 6968) to prohibit the importation of energy products of
the Russian Federation, and for other purposes, and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 973, the bill
is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 6968
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Suspending Energy Imports
from Russia Act''.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION OF ENERGY PRODUCTS OF THE
RUSSIAN FEDERATION.
(a) In General.--
(1) Prohibition of energy products.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, all products of the Russian
Federation classified under chapter 27 of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States shall be banned from
importation into the United States, other than products
imported on or before 11:59 p.m. eastern daylight time on the
date that is 45 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
(2) Authority to allow importation under contract.--
Notwithstanding the prohibition under paragraph (1), the
President may allow certain products described in such
paragraph to be imported into the United States if the
importation of such products is pursuant to a written
contract or agreement that was entered into before the date
of the enactment of this Act.
(b) National Interest Waiver.--
(1) In general.--The President is authorized to waive the
prohibition under subsection (a) with respect to one or more
of the products of the Russian Federation described in the
matter preceding paragraph (1) of subsection (a) if the
President certifies that such waiver is in the national
interest of the
[[Page H1395]]
United States and includes in such certification a
description of the product or products to which the waiver is
proposed to apply. Such waiver shall take effect beginning on
the date that is 90 calendar days after the date of
submission of such certification, unless there is enacted
into law during such 90-day period a joint resolution of
disapproval.
(2) Congressional consultation.--
(A) Prior justification.--The President shall, not later
than 15 calendar days before submitting a certification
described in paragraph (1), submit to the appropriate
congressional committees a justification for the waiver
proposed under such paragraph.
(B) Appropriate congressional committees.--For purposes of
this paragraph, the term ``appropriate congressional
committees'' means--
(i) the Committee on Ways and Means, the Committee on
Financial Services, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of
the House of Representatives; and
(ii) the Committee on Finance, the Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs, and the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the Senate.
(c) Joint Resolution of Disapproval.--
(1) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
``joint resolution of disapproval'' means only a joint
resolution--
(A) which does not have a preamble;
(B) the title of which is as follows: ``Joint resolution
disapproving the President's proposed waiver under section
2(b)(1) of the Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act.'';
and
(C) the matter after the resolving clause of which is as
follows: ``That Congress disapproves the proposed waiver of
the President under section 2(b)(1) of the Suspending Energy
Imports from Russia Act, submitted to Congress on ___'', the
blank space being filled in with the appropriate date.
(2) Introduction in the house of representatives.--During a
period of 5 legislative days beginning on the date that a
certification under subsection (b)(1) is submitted to
Congress, a joint resolution of disapproval may be introduced
in the House of Representatives by the majority leader or the
minority leader.
(3) Introduction in the senate.--During a period of 5 days
on which the Senate is in session beginning on the date that
a certification under subsection (b)(1) is submitted to
Congress, a joint resolution of disapproval may be introduced
in the Senate by the majority leader (or the majority
leader's designee) or the minority leader (or the minority
leader's designee).
(4) Floor consideration in the house of representatives.--
(A) Reporting and discharge.--If a committee of the House
to which a joint resolution of disapproval has been referred
has not reported such joint resolution within 10 legislative
days after the date of referral, that committee shall be
discharged from further consideration thereof.
(B) Proceeding to consideration.--Beginning on the third
legislative day after each committee to which a joint
resolution of disapproval has been referred reports it to the
House or has been discharged from further consideration
thereof, it shall be in order to move to proceed to consider
the joint resolution in the House. All points of order
against the motion are waived. Such a motion shall not be in
order after the House has disposed of a motion to proceed on
a joint resolution with regard to the same certification. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the
motion to its adoption without intervening motion. The motion
shall not be debatable. A motion to reconsider the vote by
which the motion is disposed of shall not be in order.
(C) Consideration.--The joint resolution shall be
considered as read. All points of order against the joint
resolution and against its consideration are waived. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint
resolution to final passage without intervening motion except
two hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the
sponsor of the joint resolution (or a designee) and an
opponent. A motion to reconsider the vote on passage of the
joint resolution shall not be in order.
(5) Consideration in the senate.--
(A) Committee referral.--A joint resolution of disapproval
introduced in the Senate shall be referred to the Committee
on Finance.
(B) Reporting and discharge.--If the Committee on Finance
has not reported such joint resolution of disapproval within
10 days on which the Senate is in session after the date of
referral of such joint resolution, that committee shall be
discharged from further consideration of such joint
resolution and the joint resolution shall be placed on the
appropriate calendar.
(C) Motion to proceed.--Notwithstanding Rule XXII of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, it is in order at any time
after the Committee on Finance reports the joint resolution
of disapproval to the Senate or has been discharged from its
consideration (even though a previous motion to the same
effect has been disagreed to) to move to proceed to the
consideration of the joint resolution, and all points of
order against the joint resolution (and against consideration
of the joint resolution) shall be waived. The motion to
proceed is not debatable. The motion is not subject to a
motion to postpone. A motion to reconsider the vote by which
the motion is agreed to or disagreed to shall not be in
order. If a motion to proceed to the consideration of the
joint resolution of disapproval is agreed to, the joint
resolution shall remain the unfinished business until
disposed of.
(D) Debate.--Debate on the joint resolution of disapproval,
and on all debatable motions and appeals in connection
therewith, shall be limited to not more than 10 hours, which
shall be divided equally between the majority and minority
leaders or their designees. A motion to further limit debate
is in order and not debatable. An amendment to, or a motion
to postpone, or a motion to proceed to the consideration of
other business, or a motion to recommit the joint resolution
of disapproval is not in order.
(E) Vote on passage.--The vote on passage shall occur
immediately following the conclusion of the debate on the
joint resolution of disapproval and a single quorum call at
the conclusion of the debate, if requested in accordance with
the rules of the Senate.
(F) Rules of the chair on procedure.--Appeals from the
decisions of the Chair relating to the application of the
rules of the Senate, as the case may be, to the procedure
relating to the joint resolution of disapproval shall be
decided without debate.
(G) Consideration of veto messages.--Debate in the Senate
of any veto message with respect to the joint resolution of
disapproval, including all debatable motions and appeals in
connection with such joint resolution, shall be limited to 10
hours, to be equally divided between, and controlled by, the
majority leader and the minority leader or their designees.
(6) Procedures in the senate.--Except as otherwise provided
in this subsection, the following procedures shall apply in
the Senate to a joint resolution of disapproval to which this
subsection applies:
(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a joint
resolution of disapproval that has passed the House of
Representatives shall, when received in the Senate, be
referred to the Committee on Finance for consideration in
accordance with this subsection.
(B) If a joint resolution of disapproval to which this
section applies was introduced in the Senate before receipt
of a joint resolution of disapproval that has passed the
House of Representatives, the joint resolution from the House
of Representatives shall, when received in the Senate, be
placed on the calendar. If this subparagraph applies, the
procedures in the Senate with respect to a joint resolution
of disapproval introduced in the Senate that contains the
identical matter as the joint resolution of disapproval that
passed the House of Representatives shall be the same as if
no joint resolution of disapproval had been received from the
House of Representatives, except that the vote on passage in
the Senate shall be on the joint resolution of disapproval
that passed the House of Representatives.
(7) Rules of the house of representatives and senate.--This
subsection is enacted by Congress--
(A) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate
and the House of Representatives, respectively, and as such
are deemed a part of the rules of each House, respectively,
but applicable only with respect to the procedure to be
followed in that House in the case of legislation described
in those sections, and supersede other rules only to the
extent that they are inconsistent with such rules; and
(B) with full recognition of the constitutional right of
either House to change the rules (so far as relating to the
procedure of that House) at any time, in the same manner, and
to the same extent as in the case of any other rule of that
House.
SEC. 3. COOPERATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY AT THE WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATION.
The United States Trade Representative shall use the voice
and influence of the United States at the WTO to--
(1) condemn the recent aggression in Ukraine;
(2) encourage other WTO members to suspend trade
concessions to the Russian Federation; and
(3) consider further steps with the view to suspend the
Russian Federation's participation in the WTO.
SEC. 4. MODIFICATIONS TO AND REAUTHORIZATION OF SANCTIONS
UNDER THE GLOBAL MAGNITSKY HUMAN RIGHTS
ACCOUNTABILITY ACT WITH RESPECT TO HUMAN RIGHTS
VIOLATIONS.
(a) Definitions.--Section 1262 of the Global Magnitsky
Human Rights Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of
Public Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is amended by
striking paragraph (2).
(b) Sense of Congress.--
(1) In general.--The Global Magnitsky Human Rights
Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of Public Law
114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is amended by inserting after
section 1262 (as amended by subsection (a)) the following new
section:
``SEC. 1262A. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
``It is the sense of Congress that the President should
establish and regularize information sharing and sanctions-
related decisionmaking with like-minded governments
possessing human rights and anti-corruption sanctions
programs similar in nature to those authorized under this
subtitle.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of contents in section
2(b) and in title XII of division A of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328)
are each amended by inserting after
[[Page H1396]]
the items relating to section 1262 the following:
``Sec. 1262A. Sense of Congress.''.
(c) Imposition of Sanctions.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 1263 of the
Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (Subtitle F
of title XII of Public Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is
amended to read as follows:
``(a) In General.--The President may impose the sanctions
described in subsection (b) with respect to any foreign
person that the President determines, based on credible
information--
``(1) is responsible for or complicit in, or has directly
or indirectly engaged in, serious human rights abuse;
``(2) is a current or former government official, or a
person acting for or on behalf of such an official, who is
responsible for or complicit in, or has directly or
indirectly engaged in--
``(A) corruption, including--
``(i) the misappropriation of state assets;
``(ii) the expropriation of private assets for personal
gain;
``(iii) corruption related to government contracts or the
extraction of natural resources; or
``(iv) bribery; or
``(B) the transfer or facilitation of the transfer of the
proceeds of corruption;
``(3) is or has been a leader or official of--
``(A) an entity, including a government entity, that has
engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, any of the
activities described in paragraph (1) or (2) during the
tenure of the leader or official; or
``(B) an entity whose property and interests in property
are blocked pursuant to this section as a result of
activities during the tenure of the leader or official;
``(4) has materially assisted, sponsored, or provided
financial, material, or technological support for, or goods
or services to or in support of--
``(A) an activity described in paragraph (1) or (2) that is
conducted by a foreign person;
``(B) a person whose property and interests in property are
blocked pursuant to this section; or
``(C) an entity, including a government entity, that has
engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, an activity
described in paragraph (1) or (2) conducted by a foreign
person; or
``(5) is owned or controlled by, or has acted or been
purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly,
a person whose property and interests in property are blocked
pursuant to this section.''.
(2) Consideration of certain information.--Subsection
(c)(2) of such section is amended by striking ``violations of
human rights'' and inserting ``corruption and human rights
abuses''.
(3) Requests by congress.--Subsection (d)(2) of such
section is amended--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in the subparagraph heading, by striking ``Human rights
violations'' and inserting ``Serious human rights abuse'';
and
(ii) by striking ``described in paragraph (1) or (2) of
subsection (a)'' and inserting ``described in subsection (a)
relating to serious human rights abuse''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking
``described in paragraph (3) or (4) of subsection (a)'' and
inserting ``described in subsection (a) relating to
corruption or the transfer or facilitation of the transfer of
the proceeds of corruption''; and
(ii) by striking ``ranking member of--'' and all that
follows through the period at the end and inserting ``ranking
member of one of the appropriate congressional committees.''.
(d) Reports to Congress.--Section 1264(a) of the Global
Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (subtitle F of
title XII of Public Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
semicolon;
(2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end and
inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(7) a description of additional steps taken by the
President through diplomacy, international engagement, and
assistance to foreign or security sectors to address
persistent underlying causes of serious human rights abuse
and corruption in each country in which foreign persons with
respect to which sanctions have been imposed under section
1263 are located; and
``(8) a description of additional steps taken by the
President to ensure the pursuit of judicial accountability in
appropriate jurisdictions with respect to those foreign
persons subject to sanctions under section 1263 for serious
human rights abuse and corruption.''.
(e) Repeal of Sunset.--
(1) In general.--Section 1265 of the Global Magnitsky Human
Rights Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of Public
Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is repealed.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of contents in section
2(b) and in title XII of division A of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328)
are each amended by striking the items relating to section
1265.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) and the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Brady) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
General Leave
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the bill under consideration before us.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I stand here today in a moment of great sorrow as the
Ukrainian people continue to endure the brutal and unprovoked assault
by Russia upon their independence.
We have all witnessed the heartbreaking footage of this war's
innocent victims. We heard the harrowing stories of families who have
been torn apart and forced to leave their country. We have watched with
admiration as the Ukrainian people have courageously defended their
homeland.
Madam Speaker, tonight, we are all Ukrainians. This unprovoked,
unjustified invasion is a horrific stain on humanity. This evening, we
here in this Congress will firmly condemn Putin's aggression with the
legislation that is before us. Inaction is not an option.
I am very pleased, once again, that the Committee on Ways and Means,
in a bipartisan manner, has led the development of this package that
will take decisive action to exact economic pain on Putin and his
regime.
The Russian regime relies on energy sales to fund many of its
offenses. This bill will cut off some of the revenue with a ban on the
import of Russian oil and energy products into the United States. The
more economic pain we inflict on Putin, the more pressure he will feel
to finally end this brutal campaign of terror on the Ukrainian people.
I don't think tonight the people of Ukraine think that Vladimir Putin
is a genius.
Madam Speaker, this legislation also takes steps to review Russia's
participation in the World Trade Organization. This is an international
organization comprised of 150 nations. Membership is a privilege that
comes with responsibilities, and bad actors who destabilize global
security should not enjoy the economic benefits of belonging to that
body.
Madam Speaker, I am committed to providing and punishing Russia at
the WTO as we proceed. Broad bipartisan support exists in this Congress
for these meaningful actions to hold Putin accountable and full support
for the Ukrainian people. With this legislation, we reaffirm our
commitment to peace and to democracy.
Madam Speaker, I urge our colleagues to support this consequential
moment and act accordingly, and I look forward to its swift passage
into law.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, while missiles and machine guns rain down death on
innocent Ukrainians, President Zelensky is pleading with America and
all free nations to stop buying Russian oil to fund this inhumane war.
This weekend, America should know that both parties in Congress came
together, worked together in agreement to immediately ban purchases of
Russian energy. I was proud to have helped lead that bipartisan effort
of the House Committee on Ways and Means and Senate Committee on
Finance, and pleased that President Biden, who fought the Russian
energy ban tooth and nail, finally relented and accepted the moral
choice to stand with the people of Ukraine.
The bill before us is certainly not as strong an energy ban as what
Congress crafted, nor does it include Congress' crucial economic
sanctions to revoke favorable trade relations with Russia and Belarus,
which would have targeted all the products America buys from Russia.
But President Biden insisted that these economic sanctions be dropped
so that nearly half of all Russian imports to the U.S. will go
untouched. For some reason, he is insisting we treat Russia, the
invader, the same as Ukraine, the invaded.
[[Page H1397]]
{time} 1930
It's puzzling why Russian diamonds and vodka deserve continued
special treatment here in America. Those revenues all help strengthen
Russia's economy to fund the war against Ukraine. President Biden
insisted, regrettably, in this bill they remain protected. Our allies
will certainly get a laugh.
This bill directs our trade representative to urge other nations to
revoke the special trading status for Russia, even though America
refuses to do it at this time. That is not a profile in courage.
I wish our President was as committed to crippling economic sanctions
as neighboring Canada, which banned both Russian oil and revoked the
special trading treatment for Russian products. To be clear, neither
the President's executive ban nor this bill takes any action to replace
Russian oil with Made-in-America energy.
Nothing in this bill includes Republican-led proposals to extend
secondary sanctions on Russian energy purchases in financing around the
world--as we already impose on Iran and North Korea. Nothing in this
bill creates access to more American-made energy on and offshore. Nor
does it approve American pipelines that could easily replace Russian
oil with U.S. and Canadian energy, or accelerate approval for delayed
permits for American export facilities to help the rest of the world
wean themselves from the grip of dirty Russian energy.
Answer this question: Why is our country begging Venezuela and Iran,
terrorist nations and thug regimes, to produce more dirty oil to send
to America when America is fully capable of producing all the cleanest
oil and gas in the world that we need right here at home?
As expected, the President is blaming everyone and everything for
high prices and inflation--including the war. Higher prices, as you
know, have hammered Americans for a solid year, all starting with the
President's $2 trillion unpaid-for COVID stimulus that ignited
inflation, paid people not to work, and fueled the worst inflation in
40 years.
Thanks to the White House, America is in a dangerous wage-price
spiral, and as a result of the President's failed economic leadership
more and more experts are predicting a recession this year. No wonder
most Americans believe our economy is already in a recession or
depression and have lost faith in the President's ability to rebuild
our economy.
To close, I will tell you this. The ban on Russian oil alone is worth
our support. Ukraine is waiting, as Chairman Neal points out. After
this bill, I urge Congress to do more: to revoke Russia's special trade
status and unleash America's own ability to be energy independent, to
replace Russian oil with American sources, and use our energy strength
to wean the world from Russian energy.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I just want to reassure the gentleman that I
remain committed to the position he has offered as it relates to the
World Trade Organization and a suspension of Russia's partnership in
WTO. Making sure that we do that in the right procedure I think is the
challenge before us, but I agree with the point that the gentleman has
made.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, in the face of death and destruction,
President Zelensky and the Ukrainians are showing the world the true
meaning of courage.
While the most immediate need is for additional military equipment,
we could respond tonight by taking another step to isolate Russia from
the world economy and ensure that Americans are no longer contributing
the revenue to fund his war machine. To take the energy out of Putin's
brutal assault, we place energy on our sanctions list. It may cost more
to fill your tank, but we must work to stop Putin's tanks from crushing
families and freedom.
Our legislation also calls for expelling Russia from the World Trade
Organization. Russia should not be permitted to benefit from the world
order and stability that it is destroying with each bomb dropped and
each Ukrainian murdered. The financial pain we are imposing cannot ease
the pain of Ukrainian families, but it is one way for us to demonstrate
our solidarity with them.
Putin and his apologists here in America and abroad must know that
those who support democracy and combat aggression are united like never
before. As the flow of Ukrainian dead and wounded grows, so must the
economy of Russia shrink.
This bill is both more and less than the original version which
Representative Blumenauer and I introduced the week before last in
immediate response to Russian aggression. It now omits the most-favored
nation treatment provision.
Throughout Putin's initial saber rattling and subsequent bomb
dropping, the administration has wisely rejected the go-it-alone
approach that lead America to disaster under previous administrations.
The President has united our allies and is determined to keep them
united. I believe as he continues to work with our allies we will be
able to move forward, as Canada has, as our original bill proposed, and
eliminate this most-favored nation status for Russia.
I am very pleased that the bill adds to what we had initially, the
extension and revitalization of the Global Magnitsky Act. This has done
a tremendous job in reducing human rights abuses, and with its
inclusion in this bill we reauthorize it remaining united against
aggression.
Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Smith), the Republican leader of the Trade Subcommittee.
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak on H.R.
6968, the Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act.
This bill Democrats have brought to the floor, although important, is
not what it actually could be. It is actually a missed opportunity to
address our trade relationships with Russia and Belarus, and it is a
missed opportunity to bolster domestic American-produced energy in a
serious fashion so that we can address energy prices here at home.
Every Member of this body knows that we could and should be voting on
the stronger bipartisan product that leaders on the Ways and Means and
Senate Finance Committees agreed to merely days ago. It was bipartisan
and bicameral. It revoked permanent normal trade relations for Russia
and normal trade relationships for Belarus.
It also included an energy import ban and instead of loopholes,
provided an off-ramp should Russia reverse course in Ukraine and earn
back our trust. The text we have before us today is obviously not that
bill.
The President demanded a lesser path and the House Democrats have
chosen to support him in that effort. However, I do know that doing
nothing is not an option.
I will support this bill, and I urge my Democratic colleagues to join
Republicans in our push to use the trade tools at our disposal to
address Vladimir Putin's unacceptable tyrannical aggression against
Ukraine.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon
(Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the underlying
bill, but I want to acknowledge the comments from my colleagues about
the bipartisan approach that we originally advanced. It is, I think,
unfortunate that we are not stripping away the most-favored trade
status from the Russians. I am convinced that we will be able to get
there with the expression that we have had on both sides of the aisle.
I think it is important that we can remain committed to advancing this
in terms of tightening the economic noose around Russia.
Mr. Speaker, I am a little disappointed with the rhetoric that we
have heard attacking the administration for not coming forth with
fanciful efforts to increase domestic production. As has been
documented on the floor repeatedly in the course of this debate, there
are ample leases that are unused now, some 9,000 such leases.
Everything that my friends on the other side of the aisle are talking
about is not going to produce one additional gallon of oil next year or
two years afterwards. These are longer-term issues that relate to the
mechanics of production, the economics of the industry.
[[Page H1398]]
Where our salvation is going to rise is taking advantage of the
elements that the Democrats have advanced in terms of clean energy
production. This is reliable, sustainable, and not subject to the whims
of international global petrochemical arguments and disputes.
In the meantime, I strongly urge support of the legislation and renew
my commitment to work on a bipartisan basis to be able to strip away
the most-favored nation status, working together to accomplish this in
as expeditious a fashion as possible.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the cooperation of the chairman of the
committee being able to move and take advantage of the expressions of
my friends on the other side of the aisle.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Arrington).
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately President Biden continues
to be inexcusably feckless in his response to global threats from our
adversaries.
Now, in the moment of truth, when America can send a clear and
unequivocal message to dictators and democracies alike by banning
Russian oil imports to the United States, the President has failed once
again to rise to the occasion.
This anemic response would remove the commonsense conditions for
lifting the ban like Russia's full and immediate withdrawal from
Ukraine and their ceasing to threaten other NATO countries.
The most egregious aspect of this proposal is that the President and
the Democrat leadership refused to revoke Russia's permanent normal
trade relation status, which will continue to allow them low-tariff
access to the United States market--a privilege only allies of freedom
should receive.
Consistent with Biden's timid response, I fear that these half-
measures will not only fail to deter Vladimir Putin, but will invite
other tyrants around the world to follow suit.
Mr. Speaker, we must unload the full arsenal, the full force of
America's economic arsenal on the Russian Federation and their rogue
leader.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Chu).
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this bill to
isolate and stop sending our money to Russia.
Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine has already caused countless
deaths and injuries while forcing 1.5 million innocent refugees to flee
their homes. There must be consequences for this belligerence.
That is why I support cutting off Russia's oil and gas imports to the
U.S., seeking to suspend their participation in the World Trade
Organization, and extending our ability to implement further sanctions.
Global trade, the wealth it helps generate and the needs it helps to
meet, is a benefit of the very international order that Russia is
trying to undermine.
If Putin is declaring war on global peace and stability, then he
should also not be able to benefit from global peace and stability.
I believe that the promise of being able to once again profit from
global trade is a powerful incentive for Putin to end his war of
choice. I am proud to support using our economic influence for peace.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Ferguson), the chief deputy whip for the Republican
Conference.
Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. Speaker, the war on American energy independence
began on day one of President Biden's administration. That war has hit
Americans hard in the pocketbook, and the cost at the pump, and for
everything else they buy has gone up as a result of this
administration's policies.
All too often we look across the globe and see the cost of those
policies, and we see that in Ukraine right now. Every single barrel of
Russian oil that we buy has at least a quarter of Ukrainian blood in
it. It is time to put an end to it.
Now we have a bill that has been much watered-down, it doesn't have
the teeth in it that it should because this administration does not
seem willing to stand up to this dictator. Now that we are having a
discussion about ending a relationship with one dictator, it seems that
the administration is willing to trade one for three, buying oil from
Venezuela, Iran, and now Saudi Arabia.
This war on pricing has got to come to an end. The war on American
energy independence has to come to an end. It is time for this
administration to open up American energy independence.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support
of H.R. 6968, suspending energy imports in response to Russia's
barbaric, inhumane, and unprovoked attacks on Ukraine and the Ukrainian
people. These imports include crude oil, petroleum, coal, coal
products, natural gas, and other products.
On March 8, President Biden issued an executive order to prohibit
energy imports from Russia, which I totally agree with. Mr. Speaker, I
support and urge passive of H.R. 6968.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Rice), the Republican leader of the Oversight and Reform
Committee.
Mr. RICE of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Brady, Mr. Neal,
and Mr. Doggett for their leadership on this bill to sanction Russian
energy exports, which I support, but I must express my frustration that
this bill does not go far enough.
{time} 1945
On February 7, President Biden stated that if Russia invaded Ukraine,
the United States would impose crippling sanctions. Yet, here we are, 2
weeks after Biden finally found the courage to call it an invasion, and
the sanctions are still being rolled out piecemeal.
Only last week, the administration was telling us that sanctioning
Russian oil and gas imports was not on the table. In the face of
inaction, Democrats and Republicans in Congress came together to impose
the crippling sanctions the President had promised but not followed
through on. The bipartisan bill would have banned Russian oil imports
and enabled the imposition of tariffs on all remaining Russian imports
to America. But the White House intervened, and my Democrat friends
withdrew their support.
Instead, this bill bans only oil. The remaining half of Russian trade
remains. American purchases will keep funding Russia's cruel invasion,
and Russia will keep its most-favored-nation status in the World Trade
Organization.
In this bill, we ask our allies to penalize Russian imports, but we
refuse to do so ourselves. Now, that is not leadership. I cannot
understand why America would maintain trade relations with a nation
that only last night bombed a children's hospital in Mariupol, Ukraine.
Mr. President, how many more innocent Ukrainians need to die before
you do what you promised? Stop projecting weakness, and just do what
you say.
China is watching. The world is watching.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Himes). Members are reminded to direct
their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Panetta).
Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Speaker, I support tonight's bills because we must
fund the government, and of course, we must support Ukraine.
As the American people get out of COVID, get back to work, and get on
with our lives, they are yearning to help Ukrainian lives. Tonight's
bills do that by providing aid and armaments so that the Ukrainians can
continue to punch Putin right in the face.
This bill, H.R. 6968, also punches Putin right in the gut by banning
imports of Russian oil, by taking steps to remove Russia from the WTO,
and by holding Putin accountable for his violating of rights with
tougher sanctions.
The last thing we want is war with Russia. However, in order to stop
Putin's paranoid adventurism, we need to bolster our commitment to
NATO, and we must bleed him of his resources to wage war by crumpling
his ruble and collapsing his economy. This will affect us, and it will
force all of us to play our part.
But despite these costs, we must continue to be as united as we are
inspired by this fledgling democracy that has flourished under fire.
That is why we must play our part and pass this legislation to support
the livelihoods of
[[Page H1399]]
Americans, to support the lives of Ukrainians, and to ensure that Putin
pays his price for his attacks on a peaceful democracy.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Smucker), who is a member of the Ways and Means
Committee.
Mr. SMUCKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to start my comments by saying that I
really do believe that there is no daylight between our parties on our
commitment to cripple Putin's ability to wage war in Ukraine. We stand
with the people of Ukraine, Democrats and Republicans alike.
I want to thank Chairman Neal and Ranking Member Brady for putting
together a strong bill to stop financing Putin's aggression. This was a
bill that was bipartisan and bicameral that would have stopped
providing financial support to Russia and put an end to importing
Russian oil. Unfortunately, that bill that they worked so hard on is
not the bill that we are debating here tonight.
Now, I plan to vote in support of this bill because I believe it is
important that we stand with Ukraine. But I want to make it clear to
the White House and to Democratic leadership: You know that we could
have done better, yet for some reason, the White House intervened, and
I don't understand.
I would like someone to answer the question: Why are we running a
product that replaced another product that would have put an end to
favored-trade status for Russia and Belarus? Why are we voting on a
product that will not be taken up by the Senate?
We had a better deal.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New
York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the
chairman for his leadership.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation banning Russian
oil and gas imports and imposing additional sanctions to punish Putin
and his cronies for their war of aggression in Ukraine, which has
caused more than 2 million Ukrainians to flee their country.
President Biden has already imposed swift and severe consequences,
including yesterday's executive action. However, it is the duty of
Congress to join the President, enact a congressional ban on Russian
oil and gas imports to the U.S., and send a strong message to the
Kremlin that none of our money will be used to bankroll shelling of
Ukrainian families.
Yesterday, the Oversight and Reform Committee held a bipartisan
briefing with U.S. and Ukrainian Government officials. The message was
clear: Putin's regime must be denied these crucial oil revenues while
we continue to provide urgently needed aid to Ukraine.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this legislation for the good of the
United States and the support of Ukraine.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Murphy).
Mr. MURPHY of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today is day 14 of Putin's
ruthless, senseless war on Ukraine. Yet, with all eyes on the United
States, President Biden has still failed to impose the necessary full
economic penalties on the Russian economy.
This week, Ways and Means Republicans and Democrats negotiated a
strong bipartisan bill that added additional, much-needed economic
punishments on Putin's war effort, a historic deal that stopped both
U.S. imports of Russian oil and suspended normal trade relations with
Belarus and Russia--that is, before the White House got involved.
To be clear, the only reason the White House is doing anything is
because it is being politically expedient. They stopped and stalled
negotiations.
The White House has subsequently watered down negotiations where now
40 percent of nonenergy imports from Russia can still continue under
this plan, fueling his war efforts.
While banning U.S. imports of Russian oil is critical, this weakened
legislation fails to go the distance and truly hold Putin accountable
for his shameful war crimes.
There is a special place in hell for evil despots who bomb children's
hospitals. We must do everything at our disposal to support Ukraine and
prove to the world that a strong America will not allow brutal
dictators to reign on this Earth without swift and ferocious
consequences.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio
(Ms. Kaptur), who represents 50,000 Ukrainian Americans.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Neal and Congressman Lloyd
Doggett for allowing me this time tonight to rise in strong support of
liberty by suspending energy imports from Russia to help crush Putin
for his crimes against humanity.
Putin is murdering innocent men, pregnant women, children, and the
elderly. He is bombing them into pieces. The brutal savagery unleashed
by Putin and allowed by his treacherous oligarchs requires crushing and
unflinching retribution.
The time has come to terminate the flow of Russia's blood-soaked oil
into our land. We must also suspend Russia from the World Trade
Organization. And let us sanction Putin and his enablers as far into
the pits of hell as we possibly can.
As the gold standard for freedom and democracy, the world is watching
America right now. This is not the time for holdouts or cowards. Every
Member of this body must rise up without delay and lead by example.
Pass this legislation. Hit Putin and his enablers where it hurts. The
just cause of liberty demands nothing less.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Smith), who is a longtime leader on human rights.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, Russian oil and gas is
absolutely financing Putin's horrific war of aggression. I am for this
bill, but there are provisions in this one in particular that should
not be in here.
Mr. Speaker, I am the prime sponsor of the Global Magnitsky Human
Rights Accountability Act which we added to the 2017 NDAA.
Under the act, an actionable offense occurs only when there is a
gross violation of internationally recognized human rights which has
the meaning given to it in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
Specifically, the Foreign Assistance Act includes torture or cruel,
inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, prolonged detention
without charges and trial, causing the disappearance of persons by the
abduction and clandestine detention of those persons, and other
flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty, or the security of
person.
H.R. 6968, however, radically strikes and replaces the current
definition of what constitutes an actionable offense with language that
is not defined--and this being done tonight without the benefit of
hearings or due diligence.
Under the new language, the President may impose sanctions on an
individual if responsible for or complicit in or has directly or
indirectly engaged in what they call serious human rights abuse.
Exactly what does that mean?
There is no definition.
How is that phrase defined?
How elastic is it, especially when it is not linked to any
international treaty or covenant?
What does directly engaged mean?
How indirect?
Guilt by association?
The Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act got it right. It
was bipartisan, and it links sanctions to internationally recognized
human rights.
I hope the Senate will take a look at this. This is an egregious
mistake.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Cloud).
Mr. CLOUD. Mr. Speaker, Putin's decision to bring this horrific
tragedy upon the people of Ukraine is rightly to be condemned, and it
is right at this moment in history that we do not fund this aggression
by proxy through the purchase and importing of Russian oil.
But it is also tragic that the Biden administration and Democrats in
this Chamber would rather turn to dictatorial, terrorist-sponsoring
regimes to fill the energy gap rather than the world-renowned work
ethic and innovation of the American people.
This administration should be doing everything it can to ramp up
production and increase energy exports. Back home in Texas, we know
that one of
[[Page H1400]]
the best ways this can be achieved is by investing in our ports, like
the Port of Corpus Christi in my district.
Increasing U.S. energy exports can provide relief and hope for the
Ukrainian people. It can give Europe the assurance it needs to break
away from Russian energy. And it can provide relief and economic
opportunity for American families.
It is past time to stop Biden's assault on American energy and
restore America's energy dominance.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Kim).
Mrs. KIM of California. Mr. Speaker, I share concerns that others
have raised on the process of our getting here, but I rise today in
favor of banning Russian energy imports. And I urge the Biden
administration to work on an all-of-the-above domestic energy strategy.
While I am glad that we are stopping the flow of U.S. capital to the
Kremlin, I am concerned that prices will rise without a plan to support
domestic energy production. Our national security will also continue to
be at risk as the administration looks to countries like Iran and
Venezuela to fuel our communities.
The more we rely on authoritarian regimes, the more we hurt our
economy, national security, and environment.
Energy security is national security. We need responsible energy
solutions to expand domestic energy supply chains and lower costs for
consumers.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Clyde).
Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Speaker, the Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act
has a great name, but the bill doesn't live up to its name.
Let me just read a little from the text because it is the text that
matters.
On page 2, ``Prohibition of Energy Products'': This bill bans nothing
until 45 days after enactment. Ukraine doesn't have 45 days.
Under section 2(a)(2), titled ``Authority to Allow Importation Under
Contract'': Why are we even having this section when the idea was to
ban Russian oil, not to allow importation?
It states: ``The President may allow certain products . . . to be
imported into the United States . . . pursuant to a written contract .
. . that was entered into before the date of enactment of this act.''
So the bold statement from paragraph 1, that all oil products from
the Russian Federation shall be banned from importation, just got
eviscerated and shot full of holes. It is leakier than a sieve because
every barrel of oil coming into the United States is covered under a
contract, so every barrel is exempted for the length of the contract.
No business makes millions of dollars of purchases without a
contract. This bill is smoke and mirrors intent on deceiving the
American people that the Democrat majority and the Biden administration
are doing something bold when, in reality, it is a false start and a
penalty on the field.
{time} 2000
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, Putin thought he could divide us because
our last President served Russian interests so very well--fawning over
Putin, unrelenting criticism of our allies, undermining NATO,
preferring Putin's word over American patriots, repeatedly pitting one
American against another.
Recently, as Putin amassed tanks on the Ukrainian border, President
Biden was not the one who hailed Putin's action as ``genius.''
As Putin ordered troops into Ukraine, it wasn't President Biden who
called Putin's terror a ``peacekeeping mission'' and who then called
Putin ``very savvy.''
Last Friday, as Russian bombs were killing hundreds of Ukrainians, it
was not Biden's trusted adviser who said Putin had been ``too gentle''
and called President Zelensky ``a puppet'' and blamed him for failing
to appease Putin by declaring a ``neutral Ukraine.''
As Biden has tried to unite, Trump and his cronies cannot stop
licking Putin's boots, even as Putin was using those boots to kick
Ukrainians in the teeth. Sadly, many of those who come to criticize our
President and his efforts to bring us together have been sadly and
totally mute, unable to voice a word of disapproval of those who would
divide us, Putin's apologist-in-chief here in America.
Let's unite and stand with Ukrainian patriots and approve this bill.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I will just point out, all of that was
nonsense. The truth of the matter is, it was Democrat President Clinton
who forced Ukraine to turn over 1,800 nuclear weapons to Russia and
President Obama who stood by when Putin took over parts of Ukraine.
Now, under President Biden, we stand by while he looks to invade and
take over a sovereign nation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr.
Graves).
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, it is very interesting where we
find ourselves right now. Just a few years ago--in fact, within the
last year--we have advocated for banning Russian oil. We have advocated
for it. Guess who has opposed it, on the record, voting against banning
Russian oil? It is a really interesting place where we find ourselves
where, all of a sudden, things have turned and folks have realized, oh,
my goodness, we have got to change our position, we have got to flip-
flop, and we now have to ban Russian oil.
Mr. Speaker, look at the policies of this administration. Look at the
policies of my friends on the other side of the aisle. We have seen
record high prices, we have seen record increases in greenhouse gas
emissions, and we have seen record energy insecurity as a result of
these policies.
We have letters from Democrat Members of Congress to the
administration begging them to work with OPEC Plus nations to increase
their oil and gas production. We have had a more than doubling of our
importation of crude oil from Russia under this administration.
The administration's failed policies have limited us to what they
will tell you are two options and only two options. We can either buy
Russian oil and fund the aggression of Putin into Ukraine, or we can
pay higher prices in the United States.
This bill fails to address the underlying problem and actually
provide a solution.
Mr. Speaker, you have seen these administration officials. Who are
they talking to right now to backfill their production from Russia? Who
are they talking to? They are talking to Venezuela. They are talking to
Iran. They are talking to the Saudis. We are going to find ourselves
right back in this situation.
The good news is, we have a solution for you. We can actually do what
the President said in this very Chamber last week. We can buy American.
We can buy American energy. Let's buy American energy, not Saudi, not
Venezuela, not Russian. Let's buy American energy, because we have 38
billion barrels of oil we can produce here and trillions of cubic feet
of natural gas.
We can do it safer here. We can do it cleaner here. That is what the
motion to recommit allows. It allows us to unleash American energy
opportunities, to unleash jobs in America, to unleash opportunities for
Americans to go back to work and unleash the economic activity
associated with it.
We can export liquefied natural gas from America to our allies in
Europe and not have them 40 percent dependent upon energy from Russia,
from Vladimir Putin continuing to this day to fund his activities
attacking Ukraine and causing human rights violations all over that
country.
I want to remind you, Mr. Speaker, it was President Biden that lifted
the sanctions that effectively facilitated the Nord Stream 2 pipeline,
and it was President Biden who more than doubled the importation of
crude oil from Russia.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the motion to recommit.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This evening's debate is about holding Putin accountable for his
unprovoked attack on the Ukrainian people. What we are talking about
here is responsible use of trade policy as a powerful tool not only to
condemn
[[Page H1401]]
Putin's aggression and pursue peace but to act.
I hope in this moment, when we are in such a dire state, we would not
use the opportunity just for partisan argument but try to focus very
hard on the real task at hand, which is holding Putin accountable.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume for
the purpose of closing.
Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to
recommit this bill to the Committee on Ways and Means.
I will also ask to have my amendment, that suspends permanent normal
trade relations with Russia, included in the Record.
While there is broad agreement to stop imports of Russian energy, to
stand with Ukraine, Congress does need to do more. That is what this
motion does.
As we talked earlier, when we talked about amending the rule to offer
American-made energy production, the idea of doing sanctions without
American energy production is incomplete at best.
But when it comes to trade with Russia, we also need to take stronger
steps, stronger bipartisan steps. We had a good, bipartisan agreement
that stopped oil imports from Russia but also removed preferential
trade on other products from Russia.
The bill we are voting on today allows about 40 percent of the total
products we buy from Russia to receive preferential trade treatment.
That is why we are so disappointed and puzzled about why this provision
was removed from the bill, because I believe that there is sincerely
broad, strong bipartisan support in Congress to remove and suspend
that.
I know that Chairman Neal is committed to working together toward
that goal. By not revoking PNTR, Russia enjoys the same preferential
trade status and lower tariffs as all of our American allies.
Ironically, unless we change the bill, Russia will maintain the same
trade status on nonenergy products, like Russian diamonds and vodka, as
Ukraine, the country they invaded. That is not right by any measure. We
need to be tougher together.
Congress can lead by passing this motion to recommit, which simply
substitutes the bipartisan agreement we reached that both shuts down
Russian oil imports and removes the preferential trade status for all
of the other products we import from Russia.
America needs to lead, Congress needs to lead, to take this important
bipartisan step and vote ``yes'' on the motion to recommit.
I strongly believe the effort in this bill to immediately stop
purchases from Russia has support and should have support from every
American, but we need to do more.
I urge my colleagues and I urge our President to stand with us with
strong economic sanctions and more American-made energy to replace
Russian oil.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, our trade policy is a powerful tool, and this evening we
will have an opportunity not only to condemn Putin's aggression, but
just as importantly, to act upon it.
This legislation to ban the import of Russian energy products and
evaluate Russia's access to the WTO will help to hold this brutal
dictator accountable. We can and will do more.
I will continue to explore, as Mr. Brady noted, how we can utilize
the full jurisdiction of the committee to stand up to Putin and to
protect the Ukrainian people.
Let me, however, take a moment to congratulate Joe Biden for the
manner in which he has assembled a multilateral alliance across the
globe to condemn and to combat this dictator. When you consider that
not only have our traditional allies in NATO--which was condemned at
one time--we now can understand why it has been so enduring.
Just as importantly, beyond Western Europe and NATO, the Swiss, the
Finns, the Swedes, the Japanese, the Kenyans, like most of the rest of
the civilized world, have stood with us in this moment of challenge.
Tonight, let us all stand with the Ukrainian people and support this
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 6968 which will cut off oil and other energy imports from Russia
which provide key support to Putin's war machine.
This bill stands in solidarity with the proud Ukrainian people
fighting for their homeland and builds on President Bidens executive
actions to ban Russian energy imports.
The crippling sanctions the Biden Administration has coordinated with
our allies have isolated Russia to an unprecedented degree: are
weakening Russia's ability to fund their illegal military offensive.
I believe that we can and should do even more. Although our European
allies have moved quickly to support punishing sanctions against Russia
and its corrupt leaders, other countries are providing aid and comfort
by actually stepping up trade with Russia.
As we look to ratchet up the pressure on Russia to force them to stop
the needless bloodshed, we need to ensure that every country is doing
their part to help end this war and hold Russia accountable.
Mr. Speaker, as an original cosponsor of this bill, I urge my
colleagues to vote yes to send a strong unified message that we are
committed to doing everything we can to fight Russian aggression, stand
with the Ukrainian people, and provide the military assist Ukraine
desperately needs to defend itself.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R.
6968, the ``Suspending Energy Imports From Russia Act.''
I support this legislation because it demonstrates the commitment of
the United States in assembling and leading an international coalition
of the world's leading nations to ensure that all nations refuse to
recognize the illegal invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation and
to ensure that the Russian Federation is held accountable and sustain
maximum economic damage from the imposition of sanctions as a
consequence of its utter disregard for international law and norms.
Specifically, H.R. 6968 bans the importation into the United States
of Russian crude oil and certain petroleum products, liquefied natural
gas, and coal.
Last year, the U.S. imported nearly 700,000 barrels per day of crude
oil and refined petroleum products from Russia so this step will
deprive Russia of billions of dollars in revenues from U.S. drivers and
consumers annually.
The bill also bans new U.S. investment in Russia's energy sector,
which will ensure that American companies and American investors are
not underwriting Vladimir Putin's efforts to expand energy production
inside Russia.
Finally, the bill bans Americans from financing or enabling foreign
companies that are making investment to produce energy in Russia.
The Russian ruble is now worth less than a penny and has hit an all-
time low after losing almost half of its value since Putin announced
his further invasion of Ukraine.
By isolating Russia's Central Bank and cutting off the largest
Russian banks from the international financial system, Russia has been
disarmed his war chest of foreign reserves and left Putin to soften the
blow of our sanctions.
U.S. and allied export controls are impacting industrial production
in Russia, Russian commercial aviation, and other key sectors of the
Russian economy.
The United States and governments all over the world are going after
Putin's cronies and their families by identifying and freezing the
assets they hold in our respective jurisdictions--their yachts, luxury
apartments, money, and other ill-gotten gains.
The United States strongly supports efforts to assist Ukraine to
defend its territory against military aggression by the Russian
Federation and by separatist and paramilitary forces.
Ukraine was the second-most populous and powerful of the fifteen
republics of the former and disintegrated Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics and the hub of the union's agricultural production, defense
industries, and military arsenal.
In the three decades since gaining its independence, Ukraine has
sought to forge its own path as a sovereign state and sought closer
economic, social, and political ties with the free market and
democratic nations of the West.
Since 2013, the Russian Federation has undertaken a campaign of
political, economic, and military aggression against Ukraine, including
the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, a civilian airliner,
by Russian-backed Ukrainian separatists using a Russian-made missile
taking the lives of all 298 innocent persons on board.
In February 2014, the military of the Russia Federation, without
merit or cause, invaded
[[Page H1402]]
the eastern part of the free and independent country of Ukraine,
including the Crimean Peninsula, and backed a separatist insurgency in
the Donbass region in eastern Ukraine, where fighting has killed over
14,000 people.
The United States, a strategic ally of Ukraine, reacted swiftly to
the Russian invasion, condemning the military action in strong and
bipartisan fashion, and providing military, humanitarian, and non-
military financial assistance to the determined but beleaguered nation
of Ukraine, which since 2014 has totaled approximately $1.5 billion.
On September 14, 2014, the House of Representatives adopted H. Res.
726, a resolution supporting the right of the people of Ukraine to
freely determine their future, including their country's relationship
with other nations and international organizations, without
interference, intimidation, or coercion by other countries, and
committed itself to solidarity with the people of Ukraine.
Interference and unprovoked aggressions by the Russia Federation
ordered and led by Vladimir Putin continued unabated, including the
mobilization and stationing of 150,000 Russian troops surrounding
Ukraine and armed forces positioned in Belarus to attack Ukraine from
the north, including war planes and offensive missile systems, and the
movement of Russian naval vessels in the Black Sea to Ukraine's south,
including amphibious assault ships, missile cruisers, and submarines,
and the positioning of blood and medical equipment into position on
their border.
Vladimir Putin sought authorization from the Russian parliament to
use military force outside of Russian territory by staging a fraudulent
on-camera meeting of his Security Council to grandstand for the Russian
public and by recognizing sovereign Ukrainian territory as so-called
independent republics in clear violation, again, of international law,
all of which was intended to set the stage for further pretexts and
further provocations by Russia Federation to make further aggressions
against Ukraine by military action.
Vladimir Putin rejected every good-faith effort the United States and
its allies and partners made to address mutual security concerns
through dialogue to avoid needless conflict and avert human suffering.
On February 23, 2022, the Russia Federation military, at the
direction of Vladimir Putin, began a premeditated brutal assault on the
people of Ukraine without provocation, without justification, without
necessity, making outlandish, false, and baseless claims that Ukraine
was about to invade and launch a war against Russia and that Ukraine
was prepared to use chemical weapons, and that Ukraine had committed a
genocide.
These actions were taken by Vladimir Putin at the very moment that
the United Nations Security Council was meeting to stand up for
Ukraine's sovereignty to stave off invasion, culminating in missile
strikes on historic cities across Ukraine, followed by air raids and
the invasion of Russian tanks and troops.
Mr. Speaker, through this legislation the United States strongly
condemns and opposes the unprovoked invasion and egregious act of
aggression against sovereign state of Ukraine by the Russian
Federation, the most provocative and destabilizing act of foreign
aggression since the 1938 invasion of the Sudetenland by the Third
Reich led by Adolph Hitler.
This legislation visits the costs of the unprovoked aggression and
invasion ordered by Vladimir Putin, the authoritarian head of the
Russian Federation against the sovereign nation of Ukraine on the
Russian economy.
The United States is strongly committed to the sovereignty,
independence, and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
I ask all members to join me in voting for H.R. 6968 to support the
right of the people of Ukraine to freely determine their future,
including their country's relationship with other nations and
international organizations, without interference, intimidation, or
coercion by other countries.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 973, the previous question is ordered on
the bill.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Brady moves to recommit the bill, H.R. 6968, to the
Committee on Ways and Means.
The material previously referred to by Mr. Brady is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be known as the ``Suspending Normal Trade
Relations with Russia and Belarus Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) The United States is a founding member of the World
Trade Organization (WTO) and is committed to ensuring that
the WTO remains an effective forum for peaceful economic
engagement.
(2) Ukraine is a sovereign nation-state that is entitled to
enter into agreements with other sovereign states and to full
respect of its territorial integrity.
(3) The United States will be unwavering in its support for
a secure, democratic, and sovereign Ukraine, free to choose
its own leaders and future.
(4) Ukraine acceded to the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing
the World Trade Organization (WTO Agreement) and has been a
WTO member since 2008.
(5) Ukraine's participation in the WTO Agreement creates
both rights and obligations vis-a-vis other WTO members.
(6) The Russian Federation acceded to the WTO on August 22,
2012, becoming the 156th WTO member, and the Republic of
Belarus has applied to accede to the WTO.
(7) From the date of its accession, the Russian Federation
committed to apply fully all provisions of the WTO.
(8) The United States Congress authorized permanent normal
trade relations for the Russian Federation through the Russia
and Moldova Jackson-Vanik Repeal and Sergei Magnitsky Rule of
Law Accountability Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-208).
(9) Ukraine communicated to the WTO General Council on
March 2, 2022, urging that all WTO members take action
against the Russian Federation and ``consider further steps
with the view to suspending the Russian Federation's
participation in the WTO for its violation of the purpose and
principles of this Organization''.
(10) Vladimir Putin, a ruthless dictator, has led the
Russian Federation into a war of aggression against Ukraine,
which--
(A) denies Ukraine and its people their collective rights
to independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity;
(B) constitutes an emergency in international relations,
because it is a situation of armed conflict that threatens
the peace and security of all countries, including the United
States; and
(C) denies Ukraine its rightful ability to participate in
international organizations, including the WTO.
(11) The Republic of Belarus, also led by a ruthless
dictator, Aleksander Lukashenka, is providing important
material support to the Russian Federation's aggression.
(12) The Russian Federation's exportation of goods in the
energy sector is central to its ability to wage its war of
aggression on Ukraine.
(13) The United States, along with its allies and partners,
has responded to recent aggression by the Russian Federation
in Ukraine by imposing sweeping financial sanctions and
stringent export controls.
(14) The United States cannot allow the consequences of the
Russian Federation's actions to go unaddressed, and must lead
fellow countries, in all fora, including the WTO, to impose
appropriate consequences for the Russian Federation's
aggression.
SEC. 3. SUSPENSION OF NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS WITH THE RUSSIAN
FEDERATION AND THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS.
(a) Nondiscriminatory Tariff Treatment.--Notwithstanding
any other provision of law, beginning on the day after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the rates of duty set
forth in column 2 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States shall apply to all products of the Russian
Federation and of the Republic of Belarus.
(b) Authority to Proclaim Increased Column 2 Rates.--
(1) In general.--The President may proclaim increases in
the rates of duty applicable to products of the Russian
Federation or the Republic of Belarus, above the rates set
forth in column 2 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States.
(2) Prior consultation.--The President shall, not later
than 5 calendar days before issuing any proclamation under
paragraph (1), consult with the Committee on Ways and Means
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance
of the Senate regarding the basis for and anticipated impact
of the proposed increases to rates of duty described in
paragraph (1).
(3) Termination.--The authority to issue proclamations
under this subsection shall terminate on January 1, 2024.
SEC. 4. PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION OF ENERGY PRODUCTS OF THE
RUSSIAN FEDERATION.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, all products of the Russian Federation classified under
chapter 27 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States shall be banned from importation into the United
States, other than products imported on or before 11:59 p.m.
eastern daylight time on the date that is 45 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(b) Termination Upon Extension of Normal Trade Relations
With the Russian Federation.--The prohibition under
subsection (a) shall terminate on the date on which the
President grants permanent nondiscriminatory tariff treatment
(normal trade relations) to the products of the Russian
Federation pursuant to section 5(b)(3).
[[Page H1403]]
SEC. 5. RESUMPTION OF APPLICATION OF HTS COLUMN 1 RATES OF
DUTY AND RESTORATION OF NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS
TREATMENT FOR THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND THE
REPUBLIC OF BELARUS.
(a) Temporary Application of HTS Column 1 Rates of Duty.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law
(including the application of column 2 rates of duty under
section 3), the President is authorized to temporarily
resume, for one or more periods not to exceed 1 year each,
the application of the rates of duty set forth in column 1 of
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to the
products of the Russian Federation, the Republic of Belarus,
or both, if the President submits to Congress with respect to
either or both such countries a certification under
subsection (c) for each such period. Such action shall take
effect beginning on the date that is 90 calendar days after
the date of submission of such certification for such period,
unless there is enacted into law during such 90-day period a
joint resolution of disapproval.
(2) Consultation and report.--The President shall, not
later than 45 calendar days before submitting a certification
under paragraph (1)--
(A) consult with the Committee on Ways and Means of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the
Senate; and
(B) submit to both such committees a report that explains
the basis for the determination of the President contained in
such certification.
(b) Restoration of Normal Trade Relations Treatment.--
(1) In general.--The President is authorized to resume the
application of the rates of duty set forth in column 1 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to the
products of the Russian Federation, the Republic of Belarus,
or both, if the President submits to Congress with respect to
either or both such countries a certification under
subsection (c). Such action shall take effect beginning on
the date that is 90 calendar days after the date of
submission of such certification, unless there is enacted
into law during such 90-day period a joint resolution of
disapproval.
(2) Consultation and report.--The President shall, not
later than 45 calendar days before submitting a certification
under paragraph (1)--
(A) consult with the Committee on Ways and Means of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the
Senate; and
(B) submit to both such committees a report that explains
the basis for the determination of the President contained in
such certification.
(3) Products of the russian federation.--If the President
submits pursuant to paragraph (1) a certification under
subsection (c) with respect to the Russian Federation and a
joint resolution of disapproval is not enacted during the 90-
day period described in that paragraph, the President may
grant permanent nondiscriminatory tariff treatment (normal
trade relations) to the products of the Russian Federation.
(4) Products of the republic of belarus.--If the President
submits pursuant to paragraph (1) a certification under
subsection (c) with respect to the Republic of Belarus and a
joint resolution of disapproval is not enacted during the 90-
day period described in that paragraph, the President may,
subject to the provisions of chapter 1 of title IV of the
Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.), grant
nondiscriminatory tariff treatment (normal trade relations)
to the products of the Republic of Belarus.
(c) Certification.--A certification under this subsection
is a certification in writing that--
(1) specifies the action proposed to be taken pursuant to
the certification and whether such action is pursuant to
subsection (a)(1) or (b)(1) of this section; and
(2) contains a determination of the President that the
Russian Federation or the Republic of Belarus (or both)--
(A) has withdrawn its forces and ceased all acts of
aggression against Ukraine;
(B) poses no immediate threat of aggression to any North
Atlantic Treaty Organization ally or partner; and
(C) recognizes a free and independent Ukraine, including
with respect to the ability of its people to choose their own
government.
(d) Joint Resolution of Disapproval.--
(1) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
``joint resolution of disapproval'' means only a joint
resolution--
(A) which does not have a preamble;
(B) the title of which is as follows: ``Joint resolution
disapproving the President's certification under section 5(c)
of the Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and
Belarus Act.''; and
(C) the matter after the resolving clause of which is as
follows: ``That Congress disapproves the certification of the
President under section 5(c) of the Suspending Normal Trade
Relations with Russia and Belarus Act, submitted to Congress
on ___'', the blank space being filled in with the
appropriate date.
(2) Introduction in the house of representatives.--During a
period of 5 legislative days beginning on the date that a
certification under section 5(c) is submitted to Congress, a
joint resolution of disapproval may be introduced in the
House of Representatives by the majority leader or the
minority leader.
(3) Introduction in the senate.--During a period of 5 days
on which the Senate is in session beginning on the date that
a certification under section 5(c) is submitted to Congress,
a joint resolution of disapproval may be introduced in the
Senate by the majority leader (or the majority leader's
designee) or the minority leader (or the minority leader's
designee).
(4) Floor consideration in the house of representatives.--
(A) Reporting and discharge.--If a committee of the House
to which a joint resolution of disapproval has been referred
has not reported such joint resolution within 10 legislative
days after the date of referral, that committee shall be
discharged from further consideration thereof.
(B) Proceeding to consideration.--Beginning on the third
legislative day after each committee to which a joint
resolution of disapproval has been referred reports it to the
House or has been discharged from further consideration
thereof, it shall be in order to move to proceed to consider
the joint resolution in the House. All points of order
against the motion are waived. Such a motion shall not be in
order after the House has disposed of a motion to proceed on
a joint resolution with regard to the same certification. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the
motion to its adoption without intervening motion. The motion
shall not be debatable. A motion to reconsider the vote by
which the motion is disposed of shall not be in order.
(C) Consideration.--The joint resolution shall be
considered as read. All points of order against the joint
resolution and against its consideration are waived. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint
resolution to final passage without intervening motion except
two hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the
sponsor of the joint resolution (or a designee) and an
opponent. A motion to reconsider the vote on passage of the
joint resolution shall not be in order.
(5) Consideration in the senate.--
(A) Committee referral.--A joint resolution of disapproval
introduced in the Senate shall be referred to the Committee
on Finance.
(B) Reporting and discharge.--If the Committee on Finance
has not reported such joint resolution of disapproval within
10 days on which the Senate is in session after the date of
referral of such joint resolution, that committee shall be
discharged from further consideration of such joint
resolution and the joint resolution shall be placed on the
appropriate calendar.
(C) Motion to proceed.--Notwithstanding Rule XXII of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, it is in order at any time
after the Committee on Finance reports the joint resolution
of disapproval to the Senate or has been discharged from its
consideration (even though a previous motion to the same
effect has been disagreed to) to move to proceed to the
consideration of the joint resolution, and all points of
order against the joint resolution (and against consideration
of the joint resolution) shall be waived. The motion to
proceed is not debatable. The motion is not subject to a
motion to postpone. A motion to reconsider the vote by which
the motion is agreed to or disagreed to shall not be in
order. If a motion to proceed to the consideration of the
joint resolution of disapproval is agreed to, the joint
resolution shall remain the unfinished business until
disposed of.
(D) Debate.--Debate on the joint resolution of disapproval,
and on all debatable motions and appeals in connection
therewith, shall be limited to not more than 10 hours, which
shall be divided equally between the majority and minority
leaders or their designees. A motion to further limit debate
is in order and not debatable. An amendment to, or a motion
to postpone, or a motion to proceed to the consideration of
other business, or a motion to recommit the joint resolution
of disapproval is not in order.
(E) Vote on passage.--The vote on passage shall occur
immediately following the conclusion of the debate on the
joint resolution of disapproval and a single quorum call at
the conclusion of the debate, if requested in accordance with
the rules of the Senate.
(F) Rules of the chair on procedure.--Appeals from the
decisions of the Chair relating to the application of the
rules of the Senate, as the case may be, to the procedure
relating to the joint resolution of disapproval shall be
decided without debate.
(G) Consideration of veto messages.--Debate in the Senate
of any veto message with respect to the joint resolution of
disapproval, including all debatable motions and appeals in
connection with such joint resolution, shall be limited to 10
hours, to be equally divided between, and controlled by, the
majority leader and the minority leader or their designees.
(6) Procedures in the senate.--Except as otherwise provided
in this subsection, the following procedures shall apply in
the Senate to a joint resolution of disapproval to which this
subsection applies:
(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a joint
resolution of disapproval that has passed the House of
Representatives shall, when received in the Senate, be
referred to the Committee on Finance for consideration in
accordance with this subsection.
(B) If a joint resolution of disapproval to which this
section applies was introduced in the Senate before receipt
of a joint resolution of disapproval that has passed the
House of Representatives, the joint resolution from
[[Page H1404]]
the House of Representatives shall, when received in the
Senate, be placed on the calendar. If this subparagraph
applies, the procedures in the Senate with respect to a joint
resolution of disapproval introduced in the Senate that
contains the identical matter as the joint resolution of
disapproval that passed the House of Representatives shall be
the same as if no joint resolution of disapproval had been
received from the House of Representatives, except that the
vote on passage in the Senate shall be on the joint
resolution of disapproval that passed the House of
Representatives.
(7) Rules of the house of representatives and senate.--This
subsection is enacted by Congress--
(A) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate
and the House of Representatives, respectively, and as such
are deemed a part of the rules of each House, respectively,
but applicable only with respect to the procedure to be
followed in that House in the case of legislation described
in those sections, and supersede other rules only to the
extent that they are inconsistent with such rules; and
(B) with full recognition of the constitutional right of
either House to change the rules (so far as relating to the
procedure of that House) at any time, in the same manner, and
to the same extent as in the case of any other rule of that
House.
SEC. 6. COOPERATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY AT THE WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATION.
The United States Trade Representative shall use the voice
and influence of the United States at the WTO to--
(1) condemn the recent aggression in Ukraine;
(2) encourage other WTO members to suspend trade
concessions to the Russian Federation and the Republic of
Belarus;
(3) consider further steps with the view to suspend the
Russian Federation's participation in the WTO; and
(4) seek to halt the accession process of the Republic of
Belarus at the WTO and cease accession-related work.
SEC. 7. REAUTHORIZATION OF GLOBAL MAGNITSKY HUMAN RIGHTS
ACCOUNTABILITY ACT.
Section 1265(a) of the Global Magnitsky Human Rights
Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of Public Law
114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is amended by striking ``6
years'' and inserting ``12 years''.
SEC. 8. ENERGY SECURITY PLAN.
The Natural Gas Act is amended by inserting after section
3A (15 U.S.C. 717b-1) the following:
``energy security plan
``Sec. 3B. Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this section, and biennially thereafter, the
President shall transmit to Congress an energy security plan
which shall include--
``(1) an evaluation of United States crude oil, petroleum
product, and natural gas imports and exports;
``(2) an energy security risk assessment, by country of
origin, of importing crude oil, petroleum products, and
natural gas to the United States; and
``(3) strategies, including changes to Federal policies and
regulations, to encourage increased domestic production of
crude oil, petroleum products, and natural gas in order to
offset any amounts of crude oil, petroleum products, and
natural gas imported to the United States from Russia.''.
SEC. 9. KEYSTONE XL AUTHORIZATION.
(a) Authorization.--TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P.,
may construct, connect, operate, and maintain the pipeline
facilities at the international border of the United States
and Canada at Phillips County, Montana, for the import of oil
from Canada to the United States described in the
Presidential Permit of March 29, 2019 (84 Fed. Reg. 13101).
(b) No Presidential Permit Required.--No Presidential
permit (or similar permit) under Executive Order 13867 (3
U.S.C. 301 note; relating to the issuance of permits with
respect to facilities and land transportation crossings at
the international boundaries of the United States), Executive
Order 12038 (42 U.S.C. 7151 note; relating to the transfer of
certain functions to the Secretary of Energy), Executive
Order 10485 (15 U.S.C. 717b note; relating to the performance
of functions respecting electric power and natural gas
facilities located on United States borders), or any other
Executive order shall be required for the construction,
connection, operation, or maintenance of the pipeline
facilities described in subsection (a).
SEC. 10. ADVANCING UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP.
Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717b) is
amended--
(1) by striking subsections (a) through (c);
(2) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections
(a) and (b), respectively;
(3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c), and
moving such subsection after subsection (b), as so
redesignated;
(4) in subsection (a), as so redesignated, by amending
paragraph (1) to read as follows: ``(1) The Commission shall
have the exclusive authority to approve or deny an
application for the siting, construction, expansion, or
operation of a facility to export natural gas from the United
States to a foreign country or import natural gas from a
foreign country, including an LNG terminal. Except as
specifically provided in this Act, nothing in this Act is
intended to affect otherwise applicable law related to any
Federal agency's authorities or responsibilities related to
facilities to import or export natural gas, including LNG
terminals.''; and
(5) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(d)(1) Nothing in this Act limits the authority of the
President under the Constitution, the International Emergency
Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), the National
Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), part B of title II
of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6271 et
seq.), the Trading With the Enemy Act (50 U.S.C. 4301 et
seq.), or any other provision of law that imposes sanctions
on a foreign person or foreign government (including any
provision of law that prohibits or restricts United States
persons from engaging in a transaction with a sanctioned
person or government), including a country that is designated
as a state sponsor of terrorism, to prohibit imports or
exports.
``(2) In this subsection, the term `state sponsor of
terrorism' means a country the government of which the
Secretary of State determines has repeatedly provided support
for international terrorism pursuant to--
``(A) section 1754(c)(1)(A) of the Export Control Reform
Act of 2018 (50 U.S.C. 4318(c)(1)(A));
``(B) section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(22 U.S.C. 2371);
``(C) section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C.
2780); or
``(D) any other provision of law.''.
SEC. 11. PROHIBITION ON MORATORIA OF NEW ENERGY LEASES ON
CERTAIN FEDERAL LAND AND ON WITHDRAWAL OF
FEDERAL LAND FROM ENERGY DEVELOPMENT.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Critical mineral.--The term ``critical mineral'' means
any mineral included on the list of critical minerals
published in the notice of the Secretary of the Interior
entitled ``Final List of Critical Minerals 2018'' (83 Fed.
Reg. 23295 (May 18, 2018)).
(2) Federal land.--
(A) In general.--The term ``Federal land'' means--
(i) National Forest System land;
(ii) public lands (as defined in section 103 of the Federal
Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702));
(iii) the outer Continental Shelf (as defined in section 2
of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331));
and
(iv) land managed by the Secretary of Energy.
(B) Inclusion.--The term ``Federal land'' includes land
described in clauses (i) through (iv) of subparagraph (A) for
which the rights to the surface estate or subsurface estate
are owned by a non-Federal entity.
(3) President.--The term ``President'' means the President
or any designee, including--
(A) the Secretary of Agriculture;
(B) the Secretary of Energy; and
(C) the Secretary of the Interior.
(b) Prohibitions.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the President shall not carry out any action that would
prohibit or substantially delay the issuance of any of the
following on Federal land, unless such an action has been
authorized by an Act of Congress:
(A) New oil and gas leases, drill permits, approvals, or
authorizations.
(B) New coal leases, permits, approvals, or authorizations.
(C) New hard rock leases, permits, approvals, or
authorizations.
(D) New critical minerals leases, permits, approvals, or
authorizations.
(2) Prohibition on withdrawal.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the President shall not withdraw any
Federal land from forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal
under the public land laws, location, entry, and patent under
the mining laws, or disposition under laws pertaining to
mineral and geothermal leasing or mineral materials unless
the withdrawal has been authorized by an Act of Congress.
SEC. 12. OIL AND NATURAL GAS LEASING.
(a) Onshore Lease Sales.--
(1) Requirement to immediately resume onshore oil and gas
lease sales.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior (referred to
in this Act as the ``Secretary'') shall immediately resume
oil and gas lease sales in compliance with the Mineral
Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.).
(B) Requirement.--The Secretary shall ensure that any oil
and gas lease sale under subparagraph (A) is conducted
immediately on completion of all applicable scoping, public
comment, and environmental analysis requirements under the
Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) and the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
(2) Annual lease sales.--
(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, in accordance with the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C.
181 et seq.), beginning in fiscal year 2022, the Secretary
shall conduct a minimum of 4 oil and natural gas lease sales
annually in each of the following States:
(i) Wyoming.
(ii) New Mexico.
(iii) Colorado.
(iv) Utah.
(v) Montana.
(vi) North Dakota.
(vii) Oklahoma.
(viii) Nevada.
(ix) Any other State in which there is land available for
oil and natural gas leasing under that Act.
[[Page H1405]]
(B) Requirement.--In conducting a lease sale under
subparagraph (A) in a State described in that subparagraph,
the Secretary shall offer all parcels eligible for oil and
gas development under the resource management plan in effect
for the State.
(C) Replacement sales.--If, for any reason, a lease sale
under subparagraph (A) for a calendar year is canceled,
delayed, or deferred, including for a lack of eligible
parcels, the Secretary shall conduct a replacement sale
during the same calendar year.
(b) Offshore Lease Sales.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct all lease
sales described in the 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil
and Gas Leasing Proposed Final Program (November 2016) that
have not been conducted as of the date of enactment of this
Act by not later than December 31, 2022.
(2) Gulf of mexico region annual lease sales.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, beginning in
fiscal year 2022, the Secretary shall conduct a minimum of 2
region-wide oil and natural gas lease sales annually in the
Gulf of Mexico Region of the outer Continental Shelf, which
shall include the following areas described the 2017-2022
Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Final
Program (November 2016):
(A) The Central Gulf of Mexico Planning Area.
(B) The Western Gulf of Mexico Planning Area.
(3) Alaska region annual lease sales.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, beginning in fiscal year 2022, the
Secretary shall conduct a minimum of 2 region-wide oil and
natural gas lease sales annually in the Alaska Region of the
outer Continental Shelf, as described the 2017-2022 Outer
Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Final Program
(November 2016).
(4) Requirements.--In conducting lease sales under
paragraphs (2) and (3) the Secretary shall--
(A) issue leases to the highest responsible qualified
bidder or bidders; and
(B) include in each lease sale all unleased areas that are
not subject to restrictions as of the date of the lease sale.
(5) Outer continental shelf oil and gas leasing program.--
Section 18 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43
U.S.C. 1344) is amended--
(A) in subsection (a), in the first sentence of the matter
preceding paragraph (1), by striking ``subsections (c) and
(d) of this section'' and inserting ``subsections (c) through
(f)'';
(B) by redesignating subsections (f) through (h) as
subsections (g) through (i), respectively; and
(C) by inserting after subsection (e) the following:
``(f) Subsequent Leasing Programs.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 36 months after
conducting the first lease sale under an oil and gas leasing
program prepared pursuant to this section, the Secretary
shall begin preparing the subsequent oil and gas leasing
program under this section.
``(2) Requirement.--Each subsequent oil and gas leasing
program under this section shall be approved not later than
180 days before the expiration of the previous oil and gas
leasing program.''.
SEC. 13. STRATEGIC PRODUCTION RESPONSE PLAN.
Section 161 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42
U.S.C. 6241) is amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(k) Plan.--
``(1) In general.--Except in the case of a severe energy
supply interruption described in subsection (d), the
Secretary may not execute the first drawdown of petroleum
products in the Reserve after the date of enactment of this
subsection, whether through sale, exchange, or loan, until
the Secretary has developed a plan to increase the percentage
of Federal lands (including submerged lands of the Outer
Continental Shelf) under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of
Agriculture, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of the
Interior, and the Secretary of Defense leased for oil and gas
production by the same percentage as the percentage of
petroleum in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve that is to be
drawn down in that first and subsequent drawdowns, subject to
the limitation under paragraph (2).
``(2) Limitation.--The plan required by paragraph (1) shall
not provide for a total increase in the percentage of Federal
lands described in paragraph (1) leased for oil and gas
production in excess of 10 percent.
``(3) Consultation.--The Secretary shall prepare the plan
required by paragraph (1) in consultation with the Secretary
of Agriculture, the Secretary of the Interior, and the
Secretary of Defense.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX, the
previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit.
The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question
are postponed.
____________________