[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 80 (Thursday, May 11, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1609-S1614]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



  PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, 
UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES FISH AND 
  WILDLIFE SERVICE RELATING TO ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND 
     PLANTS; ENDANGERED SPECIES STATUS FOR NORTHERN LONG-EARED BAT

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following joint 
resolutions, which the clerk will report:
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A joint resolution (S.J. Res. 23) providing for 
     congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 
     States Code, of the rule submitted by the National Marine 
     Fisheries Service relating to ``Endangered and Threatened 
     Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for Listing Endangered and 
     Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat''.
       A joint resolution (S.J. Res. 24) providing for 
     congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 
     States Code, of the rule submitted by the United States Fish 
     and Wildlife Service relating to ``Endangered and Threatened 
     Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for Northern 
     Long-Eared Bat''.


                   Recognition of the Majority Leader

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.


                              Debt Ceiling

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, with June 1 only 21 days away, the most 
important thing congressional leaders can do to protect the well-being 
of Americans is to say, loud and clear, default is off the table.
  That is the assurance the President gave 2 days ago when he met with 
congressional leaders. It is the assurance Leader Jeffries and myself 
gave that day at the meeting, as well. Even Leader McConnell said the 
United States will not default on the national debt.
  Speaker McCarthy, however, continues on a path to drive the country 
toward disaster. Instead of taking default off the table, Speaker 
McCarthy is taking default hostage.
  Let me say that again because that sums up what is happening right 
now.
  Instead of taking default off the table, Speaker McCarthy is taking 
default hostage.
  The strategy of the hard right remains ``our way or the highway.'' 
Either Americans accept devastating

[[Page S1610]]

cuts to veterans, law enforcement, and even cancer research, or the 
hard right will allow default--what a terrible choice.
  And that is what makes this default fight uniquely dangerous: The 
hard right is dominant in the House, and they seem to be ready--seem to 
be perfectly willing--to let the United States default.
  Speaker McCarthy realizes his hard-right agenda--as embodied in their 
``Default on America Act''--cannot win support from the American people 
on the merits. So he and the hard right are holding the country hostage 
to default.
  And if anyone doubts that the hard right is in control, all they have 
to do is watch last night's CNN town hall, where former President 
Donald Trump openly called on Republicans to ``do a default'' if they 
cannot enact their hard-right agenda.
  Never mind that, under Donald Trump's watch, Republicans agreed to 
avoid default three times without ever getting hung up about unrelated 
partisan priorities. And never mind that 25 percent--a quarter--of the 
national debt was actually accumulated while President Trump was in 
office.
  He is openly calling on his party to destroy the economy if they 
can't pass their radical agenda.
  By now, of course, it is old news that Donald Trump is about as 
qualified to run the country as a broken brick, but the danger here is 
he holds enormous sway over Speaker McCarthy and the hard right.
  If Donald Trump says that it is better for the United States to 
default than it is for Republicans to compromise, that, unfortunately, 
only makes default more likely.
  Donald Trump's demand for default would cause tens of millions of 
Americans to suffer.
  This isn't difficult: Can we all clearly and unmistakably take 
default off the table? Will Speaker McCarthy take default off the 
table? He is the only one of the five of us who met at the White House 
who has not answered that.
  Speaker McCarthy, will you allow the hard right to keep pulling the 
strings and push our country off a cliff, or will you make it clear 
that, no matter what, we will preserve the full faith and credit of the 
United States?
  Look, we recognize that Republicans have objections about certain 
policies, certain spending, certain investments. We do not agree with 
them, but these discussions are a normal part of the budget process 
that both sides have engaged in for a long time. This is too important 
for brinksmanship and reckless ultimatums.
  White House staff, along with my office, the Speaker's office, Leader 
McConnell, and Leader Jeffries, will continue to meet in an attempt to 
find a constructive way forward on the budget, appropriations 
priorities.
  If Speaker McCarthy is willing to state that, despite what Trump 
says, default is off the table, there can be real progress on the 
budget. Obviously, as the Speaker of the House, McCarthy will have some 
real influence in that. But that progress should not and cannot be tied 
to default.
  I hope Americans take a moment to listen to the dangerous things 
President Trump has said last night about default, because he exposed 
just how unfit MAGA Republicans are for governing and how serious they 
are about their threats.
  (Ms. ROSEN assumed the Chair.)


                          Military Nominations

  Madam President, now, on military holds, I want to talk about the 
profane and dangerous things a colleague of ours recently said on the 
radio. For the past couple of months, hundreds of senior military 
officers and their families have had their lives unnecessarily put on 
hold because of a Senator from Alabama.
  Senator Tuberville's actions are endangering our military readiness, 
provoking reaction not just from the current Secretary of Defense but 
from seven--seven--former Defense Secretaries from both parties.
  And, earlier this week, new comments of his came to light where he 
not only doubled down on his obstruction but also, apparently, bemoaned 
the military's efforts to root out White nationalism from our Armed 
Forces.
  Let me read the exchange with Senator Tuberville because it is 
shocking. During the interview, the Senator was asked:

       Do you believe [the Defense Department] should allow White 
     nationalists in the military?

  The Senator's response:

       Well, they call them that. I call them Americans.

  Can you believe that? Revolting--utterly revolting. Does Senator 
Tuberville honestly believe that our military is stronger with White 
nationalists in its ranks? I cannot believe this needs to be said, but 
White nationalism has no place in our Armed Forces and no place in any 
corner of American society. Period. Full stop. End of story.
  I urge Senator Tuberville to think about the destructive spectacle he 
is creating in the Senate. His actions are dangerous. His words are 
gravely damaging, and his refusal to think about the consequences of 
his actions on our military personnel and families is a stain upon this 
Chamber.
  Senators are called to a higher standard of conduct, but our 
colleague from Alabama is dragging all of us down. And for what? To 
push the hard right's party line on banning freedom of choice.
  Senator Tuberville needs to do two things. He needs to come out and 
state clearly and unequivocally that White nationalism is un-American, 
and he needs to drop his destructive holds on hundreds of our senior 
military leaders. This farce is endangering our national security and 
putting the lives of men and women who have served our country for 
decades in real trouble, and it needs to end.


                       Business Before the Senate

  Madam President, now on Senate business, it has been a very, very 
busy week on and off the Senate floor. There is so much going on in the 
country that it may have overshadowed the fact that it has been an 
extremely busy week and much is being accomplished this week.
  On the floor, we confirmed more of President Biden's appointees to 
important positions across the government. And today, we will vote to 
advance Bradley Garcia to serve as a circuit court judge for the DC 
Circuit, one of the most important Federal courts in the country, 
teeing up his nomination for Monday when the Senate returns.
  Off the floor, our committees are hard at work holding hearings and 
advancing important nominees and legislation. The Commerce Committee 
yesterday moved the Railway Safety Act, sponsored by Senators Brown and 
Vance of Ohio, out of committee and with bipartisan support. I thank 
the Senators from Ohio and Senators Casey around Fetterman from 
Pennsylvania and other cosponsors for their work on this bill after the 
derailment in East Palestine.
  I look forward to working with them to bring it to the floor for a 
vote. Today, the HELP Committee is holding a hearing on our bipartisan 
cannabis legislation, the SAFE Banking Act. We made a lot of good 
bipartisan progress on SAFE Banking last Congress, and the work is 
continuing. And there is also a markup today in the HELP Committee on 
legislation for PBM reform, which could lead to lower costs of insulin 
for non-Medicare Americans.
  It has been a very busy week in the Senate on very important issues 
that affect us all: rail safety, SAFE Banking, making growing and 
selling marijuana safe, and PBM reform, which can lead to reduction of 
insulin costs for non-Medicare people. We will keep moving ahead with 
our work to support the American people and reward the trust they 
placed in us.


               Anniversary of Buffalo, New York, Shooting

  Madam President, finally, on the shooting in Buffalo a year ago, this 
weekend, the hearts of every single American will be with the ``City of 
Good Neighbors,'' Buffalo, NY. At 2:30 in the afternoon on Saturday, 
May 14, of last year, in a predominantly Black neighborhood on 
Buffalo's east side, 10 lives were cut short from the worst shooting in 
Buffalo history--10 beautiful Americans. We will never get them back. 
They were parents, they were sons and daughters, friends, security 
guards, a policeman--all taken away from us in just minutes.
  I am going to read their names: Ruth Whitfield, Roberta Drury, Aaron 
Salter, Jr., Heyward Patterson, Pearl Young, Geraldine Talley, 
Celestine Chaney, ``Kat'' Massey, Margus Morrison, Andre Mackneil.

[[Page S1611]]

  God bless their memories.
  I don't know what could possess someone to bring violence to a place 
like that. But I do know that the Buffalo shooting was a manifestation 
of the original sin of this Nation, the legacy of slavery and the 
centuries of racial hatred that continue to poison our society.
  It is also one of the worst examples in recent memory of another 
terrible epidemic in this Nation, the epidemic of gun violence. We have 
made important progress in the area of gun violence. Last year, in the 
wake of what happened in Buffalo and Uvalde, the Senate came together 
in a way that it hadn't for decades, beating back the dark forces of 
the NRA and passing the first gun safety bill in more than a quarter 
century. Some of the friends and relatives of those who passed away in 
Buffalo were instrumental in importuning us to pass this legislation, 
and I thank them for it, for lighting that candle.
  But we have a long way to go and a lot of work to do before our job 
is done. Gun violence is a shameful blemish on this Nation. We cannot 
allow ourselves to tolerate it. Indifference on this subject has been a 
death sentence for too many Americans.
  Finally, Madam President, today the Senate will meet for a special 
caucus to talk about the next steps on gun violence. While nobody 
pretends progress will come easily, we have a moral obligation to keep 
pushing, keep fighting, keep working to rid this Nation of gun 
violence.
  May God bless Buffalo and bless all the families impacted by the 
tragedy 1 year ago.
  I yield the floor.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader is recognized.


                            Border Security

  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, the Biden administration's reckless 
policies have created chaos on our southern border, and further 
mistakes from the Democrats are taking things from very bad to even 
worse.
  For more than 2 years now, President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas 
have proven they are either incapable, unwilling, or uninterested in 
defending and maintaining our borders. Illegal crossings at our 
southern border have exploded under this administration--2.38 million 
in fiscal year 2022 alone. And that is just the subset of people whom 
the authorities actually found and stopped. It doesn't count the ones 
who got away.
  The vast majority of these crossers are single adults--not families, 
not children but unaccompanied grownups.
  Customs and Border Protection stopped 67 known terrorist suspects at 
the southern border ports of entry last year alone, but they found 98 
attempting to cross the border elsewhere--more than six times as many 
as the previous year. As of March, authorities had already seized 
nearly three times as much fentanyl this fiscal year as they had by 
this time last year.
  All of these terrible numbers have come with a stopgap pandemic 
policy called title 42 actually in place. Every month of the Biden 
Presidency, anywhere from 20 to 75 percent of the illegal crossers have 
been turned right around and expelled, rather than apprehended and 
processed in the typical way. But the Biden administration has failed 
so badly that even with this stopgap in place, our border facilities 
have still been overwhelmed and overrun.
  Now, as the Democrats finally give up the COVID state of emergency, 
title 42 is going away. That wouldn't pose a crisis for an 
administration that was willing to get tough on its own and enforce 
existing immigration law, but Democrats don't seem to be willing to do 
that--just the opposite.
  President Biden's team has designed a bizarre Rube Goldberg system 
that amounts to a special concierge service to help even more illegal 
immigrants come here more easily. It is a whole parallel system with 
processing centers in foreign countries--not to make people come in our 
front door but to help even more people surge in through the back door. 
Now I understand there is even an official U.S. Government smartphone 
app to help illegal immigrants along the journey--your taxpayer dollars 
hard at work. Our colleague, the senior Senator from Missouri, has 
correctly summarized the Democrats' plan as ``Ticketmaster for illegal 
immigrants''--``Ticketmaster for illegal immigrants.'' Remember, things 
are already at an unacceptable level before this new craziness.
  According to one public report, the authorities are already 
considering--listen to this--``street releases of migrants [into] 
communities across [the] border if NGO shelters and CBP facilities do 
not have the capacity to hold them . . . releases of migrants at bus 
stops, gas stations, supermarkets, etc., in communities across the 
border.''
  Now, this week, some of our Democratic colleagues are feigning great 
angst and indignation over title 42's demise. They claim to be outraged 
that President Biden doesn't have a better plan. But every Senator had 
a chance just last year to vote to keep funding title 42 measures. 
Senate Republicans gave our Democratic colleagues that opportunity, and 
every single Democrat voted in lockstep against it. Every Senate 
Democrat voted in unison to let title 42 lapse with no better solution 
in place. So the country reaps what Democrats sowed.


                   National Defense Authorization Act

  Mr. President, on another matter, the National Defense Authorization 
Act is a must-pass piece of legislation, but Senate Democrats have 
developed a bad habit of letting our national security actually 
languish.
  Last year, the 2023 NDAA spent 5 months in limbo. Even at the 
eleventh hour, the Democratic leader refused to bring the Senate's own 
bill to the floor. It took an informal conference between our 
colleagues on the Armed Services Committee and their House counterparts 
just to get this must-pass bill over the finish line.
  Our Democratic friends like to invoke America's competition with 
China whenever they are seeking to justify huge outlays of domestic 
spending, but they push the nuts and bolts of actually defending 
America to the back burner. Case in point: Chairman Reed just announced 
the Armed Services Committee will wait an entire extra month before 
beginning consideration of this year's NDAA. You can bet China isn't 
waiting around and twiddling its thumbs, but apparently Leader 
Schumer's Senate will do just that.
  What would the Democratic majority have us do instead? Our colleagues 
are making a push for a grab bag of left-of-center domestic priorities 
they call another China bill.
  Let's remember the last so-called China bill that we just passed last 
year. The Commerce Secretary and other Biden administration officials 
told us with great alarm that reshoring microchip production was a 
hugely urgent national security priority. This was last year. Now, that 
is a genuine bipartisan concern, and many of us Republicans actually 
agreed. But since then, the administration's stated urgency has all but 
disappeared.
  President Biden's approach to implementing the law has been 
atrocious--atrocious. They are violating congressional intent and 
trying to attach extra strings to the microchip money to end run 
liberal social policy through the private sector.
  The Biden Commerce Department has tried to say that the semiconductor 
companies can't get grants unless they tilt their hiring to benefit Big 
Labor, unless they provide all kinds of free employment benefits to the 
satisfaction of Washington bureaucrats--you get the picture. It reminds 
me of a couple of months ago when Transportation Secretary Buttigieg 
asserted that one important problem with building American 
infrastructure is the racial and demographic composition of the 
construction crews. For goodness' sake.
  So Washington Democrats have spent trillions of dollars--trillions--
on a never-ending wish list of leftwing domestic priorities, heaping 
historic inflation on the American economy, but not a penny of their 
partisan bills built up our hard power.
  If my colleagues were truly serious about competing with China, first 
of all, they would prioritize the NDAA, not let it languish, and 
second, Democrats would join Republicans in pushing for the strong, 
commonsense policies that will actually help us build and make things.
  So let's prioritize real, robust permitting reform--the Capito-
Barrasso bills. Let's green-light domestic mining for our own critical 
minerals and

[[Page S1612]]

reduce our dependence on Chinese supply chains. Let's unleash America's 
abundant domestic energy reserves. Let's combat China's rampant 
espionage and theft of high-tech research and intellectual property.
  If our Democratic colleagues really want us to outcompete China, then 
let's put first things first and stop using this issue as a Trojan 
horse for unrelated liberal demands.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Warnock). The Republican whip.


                            Border Security

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, at a press conference on Tuesday, President 
Biden was asked if the United States was ready for the surge of people 
expected to come across the border after title 42 COVID-19 restrictions 
are lifted. His answer?

       It is going to be chaotic for a while.
       It is going to be chaotic for a while.

  Well, that, unfortunately, could describe the situation at the border 
during his entire Presidency. The Biden administration has been defined 
by chaos at the border for 2 long years and counting--2 years of 
recordbreaking numbers of individuals attempting to cross our southern 
border illegally; more than 5 million attempted illegal crossings in 
total, an average of 6,300-some individuals per day--6,300 individuals 
per day. To put that number in perspective, during the last 
administration, the average number of illegal crossings per day was 
approximately 1,800.
  All of these numbers just refer to individuals who were actually 
apprehended. There have been well over 1 million known ``got-aways'' 
during the Biden administration--individuals the Border Patrol saw but 
was unable to apprehend. In fact, one in five border crossers is a 
``got-away,'' meaning that huge numbers of people are entering our 
country illegally, without our knowing who they are or what their 
purpose is in coming here.
  The fact that we have seen 80 individuals on the terrorist watch list 
attempt to enter our country illegally via the southern border since 
just October is a powerful reminder that not everyone trying to enter 
our country illegally is simply looking for a better life. And it is 
profoundly troubling that so many unknown individuals are evading the 
Border Patrol and making their way into our country. It is a problem 
that has been compounded as scores of Border Patrol agents have been 
pulled off the frontlines to provide humanitarian assistance.
  So we have had 2 years--2 years--of chaos at our southern border, 2 
years of chaos that has exacted a tremendous cost. Our border 
communities are overwhelmed. Our Border Patrol agents are overwhelmed. 
And the chaos at our border is unquestioningly facilitating illegal 
cross-border activity, including the smuggling of deadly drugs like 
fentanyl into our country.
  We didn't get here by accident. President Biden hasn't just happened 
to have presided over a recordbreaking influx of illegal immigration at 
the southern border. No, sir. The chaos we have been experiencing is a 
direct result of the President's policies.
  From his campaign on, President Biden was focused on distancing 
himself from the immigration policies of his predecessor and satisfying 
the open borders caucus that makes up a huge part of today's Democratic 
Party.
  On his very first day in office, President Biden rescinded the 
declaration of a national emergency at our southern border. He halted 
construction of the border wall. He revoked a Trump administration 
order that called for the government to faithfully execute our 
immigration laws. His Department of Homeland Security issued guidelines 
pausing deportations except under certain conditions. And that was all 
on his first day.
  Needless to say, the effect of all of this was to declare to the 
world that U.S. borders were effectively open, and the President's 
policies since that day have done little to correct that impression, 
which brings us to today.
  Today, the Biden administration is ending the use of pandemic-era 
title 42 authorities, which have enabled U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection to quickly turn back at least some illegal immigrants at the 
border. Title 42 has played an essential role in preventing the crisis 
at our border from becoming a full-blown catastrophe, and with its end, 
the flood of illegal immigrants coming across our border is expected to 
become a torrent.
  I mentioned that during the Biden administration, we have seen an 
average of 6,300 migrants a day attempting to illegally cross our 
southern border. Well, get this: The administration is expecting that 
number to possibly double once title 42 is lifted, to as many as 13,000 
illegal crossings per day--13,000 per day. If border communities and 
the Border Patrol were overwhelmed before, it is difficult to even 
conceive how things will be for them now.
  The Biden administration is busy putting eleventh hour policy changes 
in place in an attempt to stem the expected surge, but how much of it 
will be too little, too late remains to be seen.
  The President's prediction that things at the border will be chaotic 
for a while does not exactly inspire confidence that the administration 
is on top of this situation nor did the NBC article yesterday morning 
noting that the Biden administration is preparing to release the 
migrants into the United States with ``no way to track them''--``no way 
to track them''--as a way to deal with the overcrowding at the border.

       We're already breaking and we haven't hit the starting 
     line.

  That is a quote from a Department of Homeland Security official in 
that story.

       We're already breaking and we haven't hit the starting 
     line.

  So, as I said, the Biden administration is not exactly inspiring 
confidence, especially since the President continues to reject 
commonsense measures that could actually help keep numbers down, like 
reinstating the Migrant Protection Protocols, often referred to as 
``Remain in Mexico,'' which will require illegal immigrants to stay in 
Mexico while their asylum cases are adjudicated.
  We have already seen an early surge in anticipation of title 42 
ending, with the Border Patrol's apprehending more than 11,000 
individuals at our southern border on Tuesday. And I am deeply 
concerned about the border communities and the Border Patrol agents who 
will have to deal with what the lifting of title 42 brings--and not 
just about border communities because, while border communities have to 
deal with the greatest immediate challenges, the consequences of 
unchecked illegal immigration at our southern border are felt all over 
the country.
  New York City has seen a flood of illegal immigrants as a result of 
President Biden's border crisis, and New York City Mayor Eric Adams 
recently stated that his city is ``being destroyed by the migrant 
crisis.'' It seems that the Biden border crisis is even too much for 
the sanctuary cities that helped stoke it.
  Our current fentanyl crisis is also a good reminder that illegal 
activity at our southern border affects every State in the Nation. I 
have talked to sheriffs in South Dakota--about as far from our southern 
border as you can get--who are dealing with fentanyl that has been 
trafficked across the border from Mexico; and as I said earlier, that 
trafficking is undoubtedly being facilitated by the chaos at our 
southern border.
  Mr. President, this has been a grim speech, but it is a grim 
situation. It has been 2 years of crisis at the southern border under 
the Biden administration, and we are well on our way to catastrophe. 
President Biden has the power to do something about this, but after 2 
years of ineffective or, simply, absent leadership from the President, 
my hopes that he will take the steps necessary to secure our border 
aren't high. We will see what the coming days will bring.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.


                              S.J. Res. 23

  Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, later today, we will be voting on 
legislation I introduced with 20 of our colleagues, S.J. Res. 23. This 
resolution rescinds the Biden administration's 2022 rule that rolled 
back a commonsense and necessary definition of ``habitat'' under the 
Endangered Species Act from the previous administration.
  When Congress passed the Endangered Species Act, it granted the 
Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce, through the Fish and Wildlife 
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, respectively, the 
authority to

[[Page S1613]]

designate areas as ``critical habitat.'' Section 7 of the Act prohibits 
the ``destruction or adverse modification'' of these critical habitat 
designations.
  There is no doubt that habitat loss is a contributing factor to 
species' declines, so protecting habitat that is necessary to the 
survival of species is appropriate. The problem that has arisen, 
however, is that these designations have, on occasion, been weaponized 
to the detriment of landowners, the American public, and the very 
species we are trying to protect.

  Two-thirds of all endangered species are located on private lands. 
For these species to be recovered, private landowners must be part of 
the solution and not treated as the enemy. Unfortunately, through 
aggressive critical habitat designations, as well-intentioned as they 
might be, private landowners are penalized and harmed instead of 
incentivized to help with species recovery.
  A recent study that examined more than 13,000 real estate 
transactions for land within or near critical habitat for two listed 
species in California found that a designation ``resulted in a large 
and statistically significant decrease in land value,'' specifically 48 
percent for the red-legged frog and at least 78 percent for the Bay 
checkerspot butterfly.
  This is true across the country. Let me tell you a story from 
Louisiana.
  In 2001, the Fish and Wildlife Service listed the dusky gopher frog 
as an endangered species. After litigation by the Center for Biological 
Diversity, in 2010, the Service proposed to designate critical habitat 
for the species and included 1,544 acres on a Louisiana site owned by 
Weyerhaeuser Company and a group of family landowners. The Service 
included the site even though the frog was last seen there in 1965.
  Additionally, the site would require substantial modification to 
support a sustainable population. According to the Service's own 
report, designation of the site could cost the landowners nearly $34 
million in lost development value. Weyerhaeuser sued the Fish and 
Wildlife Service over the designation, arguing, among other things, 
that the site could not be critical habitat because the frog, which did 
not exist at the site, could not survive there without the site's being 
transformed from a closed canopy timber plantation to an open canopy, 
longleaf pine forest. In other words, their land could not be critical 
habitat for the frog because it was not habitat at all.
  In a unanimous 8 to 0 decision in 2018, the Supreme Court agreed. It 
said the ESA ``does not authorize the Secretary to designate an area as 
critical habitat unless it is also habitat for the species.''
  Now, the problem is that the term ``habitat'' itself is not defined 
within the Endangered Species Act. Prompted by that unanimous 
Weyerhaeuser Supreme Court case, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
finalized a rule in 2020 that defined the word ``habitat'' for the 
purposes of designating ``critical habitat'' under the ESA.
  The definition is simple: Habitat is an area that ``currently or 
periodically contains the resources and conditions necessary to support 
one or more life process of a species.''
  It seems pretty reasonable.
  In 2022, the Biden administration caved to radical groups that wanted 
to return to free-for-all designations and finalized a rule to rescind 
this very reasonable, commonsense definition.
  So we are now operating under an ad hoc system that creates decreased 
property values and predatory legal challenges for American families 
and businesses. In fact, it incentivizes landowners to make sure that 
their land could never be habitat for threatened or endangered species.
  With the Trump-era rule rescinded, there is no regulation to bind 
Federal Agencies in determining the habitat of an endangered species 
from which critical habitat can be designated. Without the certainty of 
what ``habitat'' actually means, the development of any type can be 
blocked, including necessary infrastructure projects that the majority 
of this body recently spent hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to 
support.
  It is for this reason that a huge group of outside groups endorsed 
this resolution, including the American Road & Transportation Builders 
Association, the American Farm Bureau, the National Water Resources 
Association, the National Association of Counties, the Public Lands 
Council, the National Association of Home Builders, and many others.
  In closing, the only way to recover endangered species is to enlist 
the help of private landowners in our efforts. Overly broad critical 
habitat designations do just the opposite. My friends across the aisle 
have argued these designations are necessary for species recovery. The 
facts simply don't back this up. Among the 60 species still listed from 
the ESA because of recovery as of July 2020, 51 of them never even had 
critical habitat designations.
  By lowering private landowner opposition to conservation efforts, 
which will happen if we pass this rule, our Nation can help recover 
threatened and endangered species while simultaneously supporting our 
private landowners and public land users in their worthy goals of 
providing food, energy, jobs, and homes necessary for the survival of 
our own species.
  I urge my colleagues to vote yes in support of this resolution.
  I yield the floor.


                          Vote on S.J. Res. 23

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the joint 
resolutions are considered read a third time en bloc.
  The joint resolutions were ordered to be engrossed for a third 
reading and were read the third time, en bloc.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The joint resolution having been read the 
third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 51, nays 49, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 122 Leg.]

                                YEAS--51

     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Boozman
     Braun
     Britt
     Budd
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     King
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Manchin
     Marshall
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Schmitt
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Tuberville
     Vance
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--49

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Fetterman
     Gillibrand
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kelly
     Klobuchar
     Lujan
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wyden
  The joint resolution (S.J. Res. 23) was passed, as follows:

                              S.J. Res. 23

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
     disapproves the rule submitted by the National Marine 
     Fisheries Service relating to ``Endangered and Threatened 
     Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for Listing Endangered and 
     Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat'' (87 
     Fed. Reg. 37757 (June 24, 2022)), and such rule shall have no 
     force or effect.
  (Mr. SCHATZ assumed the Chair.)
  (Mr. MERKLEY assumed the Chair.)
  (Mr. REED assumed the Chair.)
  (Mr. HICKENLOOPER assumed the Chair.)
  (Mr. LUJAN assumed the Chair.)
  (Mrs. SHAHEEN assumed the Chair.)


                          Vote on S.J. Res. 24

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. King). The joint resolution having been 
read the third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been requested.
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  The result was announced--yeas 51, nays 49, as follows:

[[Page S1614]]

  


                      [Rollcall Vote No. 123 Leg.]

                                YEAS--51

     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Boozman
     Braun
     Britt
     Budd
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Manchin
     Marshall
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Schmitt
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Tuberville
     Vance
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--49

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Fetterman
     Gillibrand
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Lujan
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wyden
  The joint resolution (S.J. Res. 24) was passed, as follows:

                              S.J. Res. 24

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
     disapproves the rule submitted by the United States Fish and 
     Wildlife Service relating to ``Endangered and Threatened 
     Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for Northern 
     Long-Eared Bat'' (87 Fed. Reg. 73488 (November 30, 2022)), 
     and such rule shall have no force or effect.

                          ____________________