[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 189 (Tuesday, December 6, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7005-S7006]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       BIG CAT PUBLIC SAFETY ACT

  Ms. HASSAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 263, which was received 
from the House.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report the bill by title.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 263) to amend the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 
     to clarify provisions enacted by the Captive Wildlife Safety 
     Act, to further the conservation of certain wildlife species, 
     and for other purposes.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. LANKFORD. Madam President, today I would like to enter into a 
colloquy with the senior Senator from Connecticut to discuss the Big 
Cat Public Safety Act. Section 3 of the bill amends title 16 of the 
U.S. Code, section 3372(e) by striking the entire subsection and 
inserting new prohibitions on private ownership of big cats, 
registration requirements for existing private owners, and new 
regulation parameters for facilities that display these animals to the 
public.
  Striking all of subsection (e) to insert the bill's proposed language 
eliminates a standing protection of State authority to enact and 
enforce their own laws in this area. Section Sec. 3372(e)(4) currently 
states that ``nothing in this subsection preempts or supersedes the 
authority of a state to regulate wildlife species within that state.'' 
By striking this protection against Federal preemption, Federal 
authorities and regulators would have the ability to supplant any State 
action or policy unless there are other sections of U.S. Code that 
protect the rights of States.
  Senator Blumenthal, do you understand this to be the case?
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Yes, I do.
  Mr. LANKFORD. In light of this protection of State authority being 
eliminated from statute by the Big Cat Public Safety Act, I would like 
to clarify that there are existing protections that apply to the entire 
chapter in which this bill amends. Title 16 of U.S. Code section 
3378(a) states that ``nothing in this chapter shall be construed to 
prevent the several states or Indian tribes from making or enforcing 
laws or regulations not inconsistent with the provisions of this 
chapter.''
  While this preemption provision is not nearly as clear as the one 
that will be removed by the Big Cat Public Safety, it is our intention 
and understanding that it will preserve the longstanding policy that 
the provisions being amended by this bill will not preempt or supersede 
the authority of a State to regulate wildlife species within that 
State.
  Senator Blumenthal, do you agree that State authority should and will 
be protected on this issue as it has historically been?
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL Yes, I do.
  Mr. LANKFORD. Madame President, I thank Senator Blumenthal for 
helping clarify the intent and effects of the Big Cat Public Safety Act 
on this matter and would like to reiterate that we are not negating 
State authority with these changes within the bill. The Big Cat Public 
Safety Act will close the loopholes of private ownership that now exist 
and fill the gaps that exist within State laws where such prohibitions 
do not currently exist.
  For States that have existing authorities addressing this area or any 
State that may enact and enforce such authorities in the future, 
Federal Agencies and authorities will not preempt or supersede them 
unless expressly authorized by that State.
  Now, with this clarification and a commitment from the senior Senator 
from Connecticut to help include language in an upcoming authorization 
bill to affirm the clarifications made today, I will lift my hold on 
this bill
  Ms. HASSAN. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read 
a third time.

[[Page S7006]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The bill was ordered to a third reading and was read the third time.
  Ms. HASSAN. I know of no further debate on the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate on the bill, the 
bill having been read the third time, the question is, Shall the bill 
pass?
  The bill (H.R. 263) was passed.
  Ms. HASSAN. I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be 
considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________