[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 130 (Thursday, July 27, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H4052-H4058]
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''

  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 614, I 
call up the 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'', and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 614, the joint 
resolution is considered read.
  The text of the joint resolution is 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.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for 
1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their 
respective designees.
  The gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.

[[Page H4053]]

  



                             General Leave

  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on S.J. Res. 24.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Arkansas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S.J. Res. 24 sponsored by Senator 
Mullin of Oklahoma. This resolution will ensure that the northern long-
eared bat remains protected as a threatened species under the 
Endangered Species Act.
  Last November, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced it would 
uplist the bat from threatened to endangered. The Service freely admits 
that a disease known as white-nose syndrome, not human activity, is the 
bat's main threat.
  Why is that relevant? The bat's habitat spans 37 States. Uplisting 
the species will increase the bureaucratic red tape critical 
infrastructure and forest management projects will have to go through.
  Yet, because a fungal disease is its main threat, those actions will 
not help the bat. Actually, the actions by Fish and Wildlife will hurt 
the bat.
  The Service is pursuing a preservationist approach to recovering the 
species by restricting forest management activities, an approach that 
will prove to be unlikely to benefit the bat but is guaranteed to leave 
our forests unmanaged, unhealthy, and vulnerable to catastrophic events 
such as wildfires.
  Non-forest management projects, such as roads, bridges, and pipelines 
that travel through the bat's habitat, will also face bureaucratic red 
tape. In fact, the Service has identified over 3,000 projects that will 
require additional permits to operate due to the uplisting.
  In my home State of Arkansas, we have a few million acres of Federal 
land, and we do a great job managing that land. Our Federal land 
managers will now be focused on the bat instead of managing the habitat 
that is actually good for the bat.
  An example of this is what was done on Federal land in Arkansas to 
help restore the red-cockaded woodpecker, which is an endangered 
species.
  As you can see by this poster, this is what the forest looks like 
unmanaged. You see management activity of thinning and burning, and you 
end up with a habitat that is an open, savanna-type forest that is 
actually a good habitat for the bat. It is a good habitat for the red-
cockaded woodpecker.
  With these practices put in place, not only has the woodpecker 
thrived, but so too have the bobwhite quail, wild turkey, deer, a 
flourish of new vegetation, and more biodiversity for plant and animal 
species, all because of good management practices.
  They now capture red-cockaded woodpeckers from this land and relocate 
them to other places. This is a success story, much like other 
management activities that we saw with the lesser prairie-chicken in 
the last bill we debated.
  When U.S. Fish and Wildlife comes in with an uplisting, it will stop 
the management, and it will actually create worse habitat for the bat, 
as well as many other species. This is hurting--let me repeat, this is 
hurting--an endangered species more than it is helping an endangered 
species.
  None of the actions Fish and Wildlife has proposed will address the 
bat's main threat, which is white-nose syndrome.
  I want to be clear: The CRA will not remove the bat from the 
endangered species list. Instead, it returns the species to its 
previous status as threatened. This approach will allow States to 
continue their efforts to develop effective, voluntary conservation 
agreements to benefit the northern long-eared bat as a species while 
also ensuring the long-term viability of local communities.
  To date, 6 of the 37 States in the bat's range have developed habitat 
conservation plans to benefit the bat while providing reasonable 
assurances to stakeholders that forest management and infrastructure 
projects can continue. These plans should continue to be developed and 
implemented.
  Again, this is a bipartisan resolution that was sent to us from the 
Senate. The Democrat-controlled Senate sent us this bill. It is now our 
obligation to pass this bill and send it to President Biden so that he 
can sign it into law and stop this egregious action by Fish and 
Wildlife, which continues to go above and beyond their authority--which 
has been given to them by Congress--by making rules that are based on 
political science, not real science.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the resolution, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, today, I rise in opposition to the resolution, but 
before I go into that part, I was thinking. Today doesn't feel like it 
is a day that we are debating chickens and bats. It feels strangely 
like Groundhog Day and that we are doing this over and over again.
  Anyway, Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the resolution. Like 
the one we just saw, this resolution doesn't do anything the American 
people have asked for.
  In my 20 years in Congress, no constituent has ever asked me what we 
are doing to put the northern long-eared bat on the brink of 
extinction. I suspect I am not alone.

  That raises a question. If the Republicans aren't answering to the 
American people with these absurd resolutions, who are they answering 
to?
  Unfortunately, the answer is the same as it has been since the 
beginning of this Congress. Nowhere is the answer clearer than on the 
Natural Resources Committee, where we see countless hearings and bills 
just like this one that attack the Endangered Species Act and our other 
fundamental environmental protections like the National Environmental 
Policy Act.
  To put it simply, the GOP's environmental and energy agenda is 
designed for one constituency and one constituency only--the polluting 
industry.
  If you have any doubts, let's just do a brief recap. Starting back in 
January, after they finally finished the 15 votes it took to elect a 
Speaker, the Republican majority wasted no time in getting H.R. 21, 
their first and apparently last open rule bill, to the floor.
  That bill was a shameless giveaway of our public lands to Big Oil. 
Despite the fact that they already have millions of acres of leases and 
they don't even use them, it was still the first important bill for the 
Republican majority.
  Next, we had H.R. 1, fittingly dubbed the polluters over people act. 
Bill number ``H.R. 1`` is typically reserved for the majority party's 
most important and visionary piece of legislation. In this case, it 
seems the GOP's vision for America is a desperate and deliberate 
attempt to give oil, gas, and mining companies every handout and every 
loophole they can dream up.
  H.R. 1 lowered royalty rates, repealed interest fees, reinstated 
noncompetitive leasing, weakened public health and safety guardrails, 
and, of course, systematically gutted NEPA.
  Given the bill's unpopularity and the grim outlook anywhere beyond 
this extremist House majority, Republicans decided that the only way to 
pass it would be to hold the American people hostage with their MAGA-
manufactured debt ceiling crisis and make the polluters over people act 
part of that ransom note.
  Unfortunately for all of us, that wasn't the end of their pro-
polluter crusade. Industry's favorite GOP enablers have already 
signaled that they are planning to use the next must-pass legislation 
opportunity that they have, likely our appropriations bills, as the 
next hostage situation.
  I guess a policy agenda that only polluters want isn't something you 
can pass through regular order in this House, which brings us back to 
where we are today.
  These resolutions attack the Endangered Species Act, one of the 
country's most beloved and successful environmental laws. In the 50 
years since it was signed into law, the ESA has protected 99 percent of 
listed species from extinction.
  No time is more important than now, while we are facing the 
compounding

[[Page H4054]]

crisis of climate change and biodiversity loss. We should be 
strengthening and supporting ESA science and implementation, not 
pecking at it in order to destroy ESA.
  Before we go further, we heard from Republicans in the previous 
debate about how it is hurting energy and Big Oil. We have heard a lot 
from my colleagues about how the lesser prairie-chicken and the 
northern long-eared bat are supposedly hurting oil and gas development.
  I want to take a moment to assure my Republican colleagues that they 
don't need to worry about Big Oil. Last year, the top oil companies--
BP, Chevron, Equinor, ExxonMobil, Shell, and TotalEnergies--more than 
doubled their profits from 2021.
  Combined, these companies raked in $219 billion in just profits. That 
is not revenue; it is just profits. This windfall of cash allowed these 
companies to pay out a record $110 billion in dividend buybacks to 
investors and CEO bonuses.
  Needless to say, Big Oil is doing okay. The chicken and the bat are 
not a threat to them, and any crocodile tears about their dire 
circumstances are just that. Let's remember we work for the American 
people and not these industry polluters.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, we talk about the northern long-eared bat, this 
generation's version of the spotted owl from the West Coast.
  What happened with the spotted owl? Radical groups, which were, 
again, using political science instead of real science, got the spotted 
owl listed, and they shut down most of the timber industry on the West 
Coast.
  Guess who the largest importer of timber in the world is today. The 
good old United States. We import more timber than anybody else while 
we watch wildfires devastate these lands in the West that were 
``protected'' so we could save the spotted owl.
  We have not saved the spotted owl and restored its habitat on our 
public lands. It is private landowners who are doing the management to 
create the habitat that benefits the spotted owl.
  This is just another attempt by the Biden administration to kowtow to 
radical environmental groups and use this as a weapon to stop timber 
production, stop mining, and stop construction projects.
  They are not focusing on the bat. They are not focusing on the real 
problem of white-nose syndrome. They are using the bat as a tool to 
stop the things that make America strong, that put America first.
  They are using these tools in the next gentleman's district, and he 
can talk firsthand about how these burdensome regulations hurt his 
constituents.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Stauber).

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. STAUBER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of S.J. Res. 24, 
the Congressional Review Act disapproval of the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife's listing of the northern long-eared bat under the Endangered 
Species Act.
  I was proud to introduce the House companion to this resolution. I 
thank Senator Markwayne Mullin for his partnership and leadership on 
this issue.
  The intended purpose of the Endangered Species Act when it was passed 
into law half a century ago was to protect and conserve species. Once 
the species is restored and stabilized, it is supposed to be delisted 
and its population responsibly managed.
  Unfortunately, this well-intentioned law is abused time and time 
again by radical activist extremists who would rather see a species 
stay listed forever to help their own agenda than follow the original 
intent of the law.
  Time and time again, radical activist extremists have weaponized the 
Endangered Species Act, using it as a tool to block development, block 
progress, and block society from moving forward.
  Rather than utilizing the law to protect different species, radical 
extreme activists see the Endangered Species Act as a basis for their 
frivolous lawsuits and as a tool to force their radical ideology onto 
the rest of the country.
  Take the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the greatest abusers 
of this scheme, as an example. When the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
decided against listing the Minnesota and Midwestern moose in 2020, 
they shared with the Minneapolis Star Tribune: ``Now it's going to be a 
lot harder to ensure that things like mines and other habit-destroying 
projects don't go forward. . . .''
  Madam Speaker, the Center for Biological Diversity said the quiet 
part out loud. Their intent was not to protect the species but abuse 
the Endangered Species Act to advance their radical anti-mining, 
antidevelopment agenda.
  Today, the northern long-eared bat can be found across more than half 
of the lower 48. Its listing under the Endangered Species Act is not 
based in science. The northern long-eared bat is affected by white-nose 
syndrome, a disease that has no ties to human activity.
  Unjustified concern for the northern long-eared bat is being used to 
stop important development and infrastructure projects left and right.
  While my colleagues on the other side of the aisle cheer its listing, 
I have to break it to them that this irresponsible listing will hurt 
other projects as well. This listing will block renewable energy 
projects, transmission projects, and wind and solar projects.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. STAUBER. Madam Speaker, its listing will jeopardize wildfire 
mitigation, road and infrastructure construction, and agriculture. What 
my colleagues might not realize is this listing will even block 
projects that would benefit the species.
  The Endangered Species Act is an important law that can help move our 
country forward. We should return to its intended purpose as a tool for 
conservation and good stewardship of our environment, not a tool for 
the radical activist extreme agenda.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. This 
is a good piece of legislation that came out of the Democrat-controlled 
Senate, and we ought to pass it this afternoon on the House floor.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Madam Speaker, this week in the Rules Committee, we 
heard one House Republican say: Long-eared bats? I hope the white-nose 
syndrome wipes them all out and we don't have to worry about it.
  A vote for this resolution is a vote for the extinction of the 
northern long-eared bat.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Neguse), the ranking member on the Federal Lands Subcommittee of the 
Natural Resources Committee.
  Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank the ranking member for his service 
and for yielding me time. I certainly concur with the sentiments that 
he has expressed.
  We hear from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle that this 
resolution is somehow designed to modernize the Endangered Species Act. 
Of course, the American people know better. They understand that this 
resolution is designed to undermine the Endangered Species Act, and we 
heard that over and over again during the Rules Committee proceeding 
that the ranking member referenced.
  Putting that aside for a moment, I suspect many Americans who are 
watching today, Madam Speaker, are wondering what in the world is the 
House of Representatives debating today? They are not the only ones.
  Earlier this afternoon, the majority leader from the Republican side 
announced that this House would be adjourning this evening. Now, as you 
know, Madam Speaker, in 65 days, the Federal Government will not be 
able to function absent this Congress passing a budget and averting a 
government shutdown.
  The congressional recess that Republican leadership has announced 
that apparently is set to commence in less than 2 hours is 45 days 
long. Madam Speaker, you can do the math. That leaves this Congress 
with precious little time to do the people's business: To pass a budget 
to fund the government.
  Instead of doing that, we are debating, what? The northern long-eared 
bat. That is how Republicans in Washington have determined to spend the 
waning hours of this congressional session. It is consistent with the 
way that

[[Page H4055]]

they have conducted their majority in this House for the better part of 
the last 7 months.
  No bills to lower costs, no bills to grow the middle class, no bills 
to build safer communities. Bills on gas stoves, hearings on gas 
stoves, three hearings on gas stoves, bills on the lesser prairie-
chicken and the northern long-eared bat.
  The priorities that House Republicans have pursued in this Chamber 
are grossly out of step with the priorities of the American people. The 
American people expect us to do the people's work, and we are not doing 
that today.
  I believe that in 65 days, when House Republicans shut down the 
government--which they seem determined to do, given that they have 
passed one appropriation bill before they have decided to send 
everybody home--the American people will be right to question the 
priorities of congressional Republicans; why they dither instead of 
working in good faith with their colleagues to fund the government, to 
do the basic work of governing. It is an important question, and one I 
hope every American asks of my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, as Republicans, we care about Americans, American 
companies, American small businesses, and American workers. My 
colleagues across the aisle were talking about the record profits of 
U.S. oil and gas companies. Well, they might need to read the news a 
little bit deeper and look at the profits of Aramco, the Saudi-owned 
oil company.
  There was an article in March of this year that said that Aramco's 
profits were $161 billion, `` . . . the largest annual profit ever 
recorded by an oil and gas company. . . .'' Aramco, the Saudi-owned 
company. The Saudis, the ones President Biden went to and begged them 
to send us more oil because of his attack on energy here in America. 
Look who now has the largest profits of any oil company in the history 
of the world.
  That is what these kinds of policies add up to. It is a thousand 
cuts. It is death by a thousand cuts. It is using every rule, every 
opportunity that they have to attack American energy, which makes 
America less strong, which feeds into the hands of our adversaries. 
Instead of us dominating energy, we become dependent on others to 
supply energy--OPEC and OPEC+ countries.
  How does Putin fund his war in Ukraine? He funds it with high 
revenues off his oil and gas. We can change that. We can produce more 
gas and export it to our allies in Europe, but not under this 
administration, not when they are promoting rules like the lesser 
prairie-chicken, the northern long-eared bat. They don't do a 5-year 
plan, they don't do leases on Federal lands or Federal waters. It is an 
all-out attack on American energy. This is just another spoke in the 
wheel, another cut against the American people, against the American 
economy, and against the future of our country.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Thompson), chairman of the Ag Committee, who knows a little bit 
about the northern long-eared bat.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, yes, this is an area 
that I have worked on for some time, northern long-eared bats. I have 
actually spent a lot of time in caves with a Pennsylvania bat biologist 
who works for the Pennsylvania Game Commission, where we did bat 
counts.
  We looked at white-nose syndrome, which really has nothing to do with 
humans. This is a fungus. I think it has been around now for at least 
20 years. In 2013, we had this same debate. In October 2013, there was 
an effort to try to list these northern long-eared bats as endangered. 
It was an extended debate.
  Quite frankly, under the Obama administration, just a few years 
later, we were successful in keeping them from being listed as 
endangered. They were listed as threatened because what we needed more 
than anything else was research. We have provided that research now for 
10 years, and there are good findings. We know that the temperature 
within those dwellings where they hibernate, the colder the 
temperature, the more that we can reduce how often they wake up. Quite 
frankly, it is when they wake up, when their hibernation is interrupted 
that weakens the bat, and they have more difficulties reproducing 
because they just don't have the energy for it, I guess.
  This is like, here we go again. The distinguished ranking member 
mentioned Groundhog Day. I thank him for doing that. That is my 
district, Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, Groundhog Day. Here we are again, 
trying to relitigate through the Biden administration something that 
doesn't line up with the science. The science has already been 
established in the past.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this joint 
resolution to nullify the final rule classifying the northern long-
eared bat as an endangered species as inappropriate. We need to 
continue to do the research. We need to allow the professionals to 
continue the work that they are doing and making the advancements that 
they are doing on how we can help with the environment to mitigate 
that.
  The U.S. bat population plays an extremely important role in 
Pennsylvania's ecosystem and, quite frankly, America's number one 
industry, which is agriculture. The existing classification of the 
northern long-eared bats as a threatened species does not help the 
bats. It does not help the bats. We need to strike a balance between 
species conservation and economic activity.
  Uplisting this species is shortsighted, and this top-down approach to 
species conservation is inflexible and outdated. There is no question 
this bat population has been in decline, but it is important to 
understand why. Study after study, including by Penn State University, 
which is in my district, has shown the decline is attributed to white-
nose syndrome. This is a disease, a fungus that has no cure and is not 
caused by human activity.
  With this decision, the Biden administration is punishing small 
businesses, farmers, foresters, energy producers, those who transmit 
electricity because this would impact the ability to clear fallen 
timber off of power lines. I mean, the impact is just extensive, to 
cover the cost of something they have no control over.
  This uplisting will delay everything from broadband expansion to 
critical infrastructure repairs. Restrictions accompanying this 
decision will have significant and detrimental economic impacts in my 
district and others across the region. There is zero evidence that 
listing this bat as endangered will stop the spread of this disease.

                              {time}  1445

  It is vital a decision of this magnitude be based on actual data and 
real science, not political science, and include input from impacted 
communities and landowners.
  As we search for a cure, States should be able to take the lead on 
local, voluntary conservation efforts that help affected populations.
  I support this joint resolution which protects landowners from 
unnecessary government regulation, and I urge all of my colleagues to 
do so, as well.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Madam Speaker, supporters of this resolution, my 
Republican colleagues claim that protecting these species will upend 
timber industries and forest management and a list of economic 
activities. That is simply not true.
  What specifically about forest management practice would be altered 
by the rule, especially given the preemptive consultations that the 
southern and eastern forest service regions completed last year.
  Last year, in anticipation of these new listing statuses, the U.S. 
Forest Service preemptively completed consultation on thousands of 
permits to ensure that they faced no delays in ongoing or previously 
approved projects with the new listing status.
  In addition, my colleagues and I secured over $1 billion in funding 
last year for Federal agencies to hire staff and expedite Federal 
permitting, but Republicans voted against that effort and are now 
pushing extreme CRAs to worsen the dire state of America's wildlife.
  It should be noted that bats are critically important to U.S. 
agriculture and timber industries. Bats have provided up to $53 billion 
yearly in pest control services to the U.S. agricultural industry. The 
northern long-eared bat provides these services throughout the 37 
States that it inhabits.

[[Page H4056]]

  We keep seeing the signs about modernizing the Endangered Species 
Act. Republicans keep saying that they just want to modernize the 
Endangered Species Act, but this giveaway to dirty oil and gas looks 
like they want to monetize the Endangered Species Act.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Newhouse), the chairman of the Congressional Western 
Caucus.
  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas for 
letting me be part of this conversation today.
  Madam Speaker, as you understand, I rise in support of S.J. Res. 24, 
which is an effort to disapprove the endangered listing of the northern 
long-eared bat by the Fish and Wildlife Service.
  As you just heard, I am chairman of the Western Caucus, and I can 
tell you that I know firsthand how radical environmental groups will, 
unfortunately, weaponize the Endangered Species Act in an attempt to 
end development of resources in our country and prevent responsible 
forest management. This is just beyond the pale that these groups will 
do that, impacting communities around our country.
  The northern long-eared bat exists in 37 States in the United States, 
ranging from eastern Montana, all the way to South Carolina and up to 
the State of Maine.
  Last year, at the urging of some of these groups, Fish and Wildlife 
uplisted the bat from threatened to endangered. But as you have heard, 
the decline is not due to any human activity. It is, rather, an 
incurable fungal disease known as White-Nose Syndrome.
  Even the Fish and Wildlife Service themselves, in the uplisting, 
stated that the White-Nose Syndrome is the main threat to the bat, 
meaning that the endangered status will do little, if anything, to 
recover the population.
  Instead, what I will bet will happen, you can rest assured will 
happen, forest management will be further restricted.
  Infrastructure projects, as the chairman mentioned, solar farms, wind 
farms, all kinds of infrastructure projects on both public as well as 
private lands, will be hampered, slowed, or even stopped with 
additional, unnecessary and burdensome regulations.
  This administration continues to ignore our Nation's farmers, 
ranchers, and landowners in favor of these radical groups. So this 
resolution, I think, is critical to preventing government overreach, 
and I will continue to push for commonsense reform to the Endangered 
Species Act alongside my colleagues on our ESA working group.
  Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this CRA.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Madam Speaker, a comprehensive review of all 88,000-
plus ESA consultations from 2008 to 2015 found that no project was 
stopped or extensively altered as a result of Fish and Wildlife finding 
jeopardy or adverse modification during this period, and that the 
medium consultation duration is far lower than the maximum allowed by 
the Act.
  Setting the record straight on that, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, we have heard it said, this won't affect 
the timber industry. This won't affect the construction activities of 
the country, and I am sure this was said back in the 1990s when the 
spotted owl was listed. This won't affect the timber companies. Go tell 
that to the mill towns on the West Coast that were devastated by this 
weaponized rule.
  This, again, is just another attempt by the Biden administration to 
use whatever tool they can to go against the things that they oppose. 
It is not based on science. It is based on--it is science, it is 
political science, that they are trying to push an agenda. I don't 
understand why they are trying to push this agenda.
  Why do they not want America to succeed? Why do they not want rural 
America to be able to supply the goods and the services that this 
country depends on?
  It is another obstacle that they will use as a weapon that is not 
going to help the long-eared bat. It is not going to help other 
species. It is actually going to hurt them when we stop management on 
our Federal lands and also on private lands where these bats are 
located.
  Again, this is something that is important. It shouldn't be 
downplayed. I think it is an affront to rural America to say this isn't 
an important issue, and I think it is an affront to all Americans, even 
those that believe that breakfast comes from the grocery store and heat 
comes from the furnace, that don't appreciate the hardworking men and 
women across this country that provide those things.

  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time and I am prepared to 
close. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, as we end this debate on this particular issue, I had 
mentioned in the previous debate that let's not forget the underlying 
issue here. It is about energy policy. It is about energy development 
policy, and it is about a transition of dealing with the climate crisis 
and making the transition to renewable and clean energy across this 
country that is cheaper and is provided equitably. That is the goal. 
That is where we need to be.
  The effort on the part of Republican majority is to continue to grow 
the dependency on fossil fuels and polluting industries that have 
contributed significantly to this climate crisis that we are involved 
with.
  We see it around us every day. We are all going to go home to our 
States and our districts to deal with the issues of heat, drought, 
wildfires, et cetera, lack of water availability and nutrition 
availability.
  To continue to go on a path where we reinforce the past practice by 
picking at and beginning to dismantle fundamental issues like clean 
air, clean water laws, Endangered Species Act that deals with 
preserving biodiversity that is critical to our lives, and the public's 
right to know and to participate with the National Environmental Policy 
Act, that is the agenda.
  To reward Big Oil and big industry one more time, to build a 
dependency, maximize their profits, and then somewhere down the line, 
when the crisis of the climate is so untenable for the American people, 
we will deal with it. At that point it will be expensive, it will be 
painful, and people will suffer while we get to that point.
  At the Rules Committee hearing earlier this week, one of my 
Republican colleagues admitted that he hoped the white-nose syndrome 
wipes out all the northern long-eared bats so that we won't have to 
worry about it. It was a pretty bold thing to admit out loud, and a 
little shortsighted, I might add.
  The northern long-eared bat, like every species of bat we are 
fortunate that we have left, is critical to our ecosystem and the 
agricultural industry. So if these bats are wiped out, I want to point 
out that we actually do have to worry about it.
  I also can't help but be struck by the similarities between my 
Republican colleagues' let's call it unique wildlife conservation 
strategy and the approach they are taking on many of the other issues 
facing the American people right now, ignoring the facts, ignoring the 
science, and just letting the damage ensue that has become an all-too-
common GOP policy plan.
  Climate change, of course, is one of the most pressing issues where 
the GOP plan is all too clear.
  So as we wrap up here and head back to our districts, I leave my 
colleagues with some final thoughts. If the northern long-eared bat 
goes extinct, we need to worry about it. If the lesser prairie-chicken 
goes extinct, we need to worry about it.
  If the climate crisis keeps barreling forward over these next 2 
years, while our Republican colleagues refuse to do a single thing to 
protect communities, local businesses, and our health, we most 
certainly need to worry about that.
  The issue for me is not singular to these two CRAs. It is about a 
very coordinated and deliberate effort to undo protections for the 
American people and for species, and to deny and to avoid dealing with 
the monumental crisis that we have before us, which is climate.
  If we prepare in transition now, we can make it an equitable and less 
painful process. If we continue to pass resolutions like this and 
continue to follow a Big Oil, Big Gas agenda that the GOP presses upon 
this Congress and the American people, then that climate crisis is 
going to be painful, expensive, and costly to both humans and to our 
economy.

[[Page H4057]]

  Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the resolution, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  We are having productive talks with our commonsense friends across 
the aisle on permitting reform. We made some progress in the debt limit 
bill, and putting some sideboards on NEPA, on pushing back against 
these out-of-control agencies that are delaying projects.
  I would just caution my friends on the other side of the aisle that 
these rules that are based on a political agenda can cut both ways. 
Those rules can be used to stop projects that my friends would support, 
as well as stopping ones that they don't like.

  It almost seems like there is this atmosphere of stopping everything. 
It is what I call the preservationist approach. I believe the central 
question facing us today is do we support a preservationist approach to 
not just recovering the northern long-eared bat, or do we support a 
conservationist approach?
  I wholeheartedly believe that a conservationist approach is what will 
be most successful in maintaining bat habitat, in maintaining lesser 
prairie-chicken habitat, and helping all of our endangered species if 
we will actively work for conservation to create habitat that supports 
these species.
  A preservationist approach will do nothing. It is basically this idea 
that we take a hands-off approach. We put an invisible fence around our 
public lands and these habitat areas and just hope for the best.
  I often tell people that when you talk about conservation, you are 
talking about being a good steward. It is like being a gardener. It is 
like taking care of what you have got, leaving the Earth in a better 
place than you found it for future generations.
  A preservationist wants to lock up the natural world and say we are 
going to keep it here like that piece of art on the wall. I say that 
conservation is for critters and preservation is for pickles.
  The only way we preserve the outdoors with nature that is a living 
dynamic organism--it is like when you pluck a cucumber and you boil it 
in vinegar and you put it in a jar, you preserve it. That is not going 
to work for species habitat. It is not going to work for rural America 
that provides the necessities that our country needs.

                              {time}  1500

  The preservationist approach benefits no one, least of all the 
northern long-eared bat. By returning the status of the bat to 
threatened, Congress will be telling this administration that it 
believes in conservation, not preservation. Again, I remind this 
Chamber, this is a bipartisan bill that was sent to the House from a 
Democratic-controlled Senate.
  We should pass this CRA, which would put it on President Biden's 
desk. If he cares about America, especially if he cares about rural 
America, he should sign this and stop his out-of-control 
administration.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the CRA, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in opposition to S.J. 
Res. 24, which relates to the endangered species status of the Northern 
Long-Eared Bat.
  S.J. Res. 24 is a resolution of congressional disapproval to 
legislatively down-list the Northern Long-Eared Bat from ``endangered'' 
to ``threatened.''
  Not only would this downgrade the Northern Long-Eared Bat's status 
today, but it would effectively block the species from being moved up 
to a higher endangered threat level, no matter how close the species 
comes to extinction.
  It would be irresponsible to use extreme legislation, not science, to 
down-list the Northern Long-Eared Bat, thereby effectively scaling back 
its protections under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
  Without ESA protections, states, industries, and other entities will 
have little incentive to conserve or recover the Northern Long-Eared 
Bat.
  It is highly likely that the bat populations would dwindle further 
toward extinction.
  Moreover, by using the Congressional Review Act Process, this 
Congress is effectively limiting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
from making similar future listings for this bat species.
  This proposition would prevent the agency from using its discretion 
to take the necessary measures for species conservation and will impede 
long-term recovery efforts.
  Ultimately, Congressional action in this regard gives industries, not 
science, the upper hand in species listings.
  It is clear that some of my colleagues are doing the bidding of the 
timber and agriculture industries, despite the consequences that 
Northern Long-Eared Bat extinction could have on biodiversity and long-
term agriculture and timber industry practices.
  Down-listing this species would be especially dangerous in the 
current moment because the Northern Long-Eared Bat population is 
actively under threat from white nose syndrome, a deadly fungus that 
has caused a rapid decline in bat populations.
  The Northern Long-Eared Bat's current endangered status provides 
adequate protections while wildlife scientists work to address the 
underlying causes of white-nose syndrome.
  Congress should not be interfering with the work of the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service under its Endangered Species Act authority.
  Species populations are constantly fluctuating based on environmental 
factors, invasive species, climate change, and other emerging threats.
  To remain up to date, the ESA requires periodic study and updates to 
ensure protections align with the best available science.
  By blocking future up-listing decisions, using the Congressional 
Review Act undercuts the ESA's inherent flexibility and agencies' 
science-based decision-making for species conservation.
  I urge my colleagues to support science-based decisions for 
endangered and threatened species and oppose this bill.
  Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to S.J. 
Res. 24.
  This year, we're celebrating the 50th anniversary of the enactment of 
the Endangered Species Act.
  This milestone anniversary is very special to me. Not only is 
protecting America's imperiled species one of my top priorities, but 
it's a value that was shared by my husband.
  As an avid outdoorsman, strengthening our Nation's conservation and 
environmental policies was a core value of his, which is why he was 1 
of the lead authors of the Endangered Species Act 50 years ago.
  But instead of celebrating this historic legislation's successes over 
the course of the last half century, our colleagues across the aisle 
are pushing legislation to worsen the already-dire state of America's 
wildlife and attack the Endangered Species Act.
  We are in the midst of a biodiversity crisis that's threatening the 
future of some of America's most treasured species. A report has 
recently found that 49 percent of bird species worldwide have declining 
populations, and monarch butterflies have declined 85 percent in 2 
decades. This should alarm all of us.
  That's why I'm so disappointed with the resolution under 
consideration, and further attack the ESA by using the Congressional 
Review Act to gut protections for the lesser prairie-chicken and 
northern long-eared bat.
  I want to take a moment to point out how ridiculous and ill-timed 
these resolutions are.
  We are all preparing to go home and spend the next 6 weeks working in 
our districts. So this week, the last time we will be passing 
legislation until September, our colleagues have decided to use these 
final moments to push bats and chickens to the brink of extinction 
instead of doing anything to actually address our Nation's worsening 
biodiversity crisis, like making proactive investments in wildlife to 
prevent the need for additional listings in the first place.
  In the middle of an expanding heatwave that's directly harming 
communities across the Nation, I find inaction on the climate and 
biodiversity crisis irresponsible and these resolutions entirely 
misguided.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Moran). All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the previous question is ordered on the joint 
resolution.
  The question is on the third reading of the joint resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the joint 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 220, 
nays 209, not voting 4, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 382]

                               YEAS--220

     Aderholt
     Alford
     Allen
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington

[[Page H4058]]


     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bean (FL)
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brecheen
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Burlison
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chavez-DeRemer
     Ciscomani
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Collins
     Comer
     Crane
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Curtis
     D'Esposito
     Davidson
     De La Cruz
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duarte
     Duncan
     Dunn (FL)
     Edwards
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Estes
     Ezell
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Finstad
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fleischmann
     Flood
     Foxx
     Franklin, C. Scott
     Fry
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garbarino
     Garcia, Mike
     Gimenez
     Golden (ME)
     Gonzales, Tony
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hageman
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hern
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Hinson
     Houchin
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunt
     Issa
     Jackson (TX)
     James
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Kean (NJ)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kiggans (VA)
     Kiley
     Kim (CA)
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaLota
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Langworthy
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lawler
     Lee (FL)
     Lesko
     Letlow
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Luna
     Luttrell
     Mace
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Massie
     Mast
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McCormick
     McHenry
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (OH)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Mills
     Molinaro
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Moran
     Murphy
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunn (IA)
     Obernolte
     Ogles
     Owens
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     Reschenthaler
     Rodgers (WA)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Salazar
     Santos
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Self
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Strong
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Van Orden
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yakym
     Zinke

                               NAYS--209

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Auchincloss
     Balint
     Barragan
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bowman
     Boyle (PA)
     Brown
     Brownley
     Budzinski
     Bush
     Caraveo
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson
     Carter (LA)
     Cartwright
     Casar
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Cherfilus-McCormick
     Chu
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Craig
     Crockett
     Crow
     Davids (KS)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (NC)
     Dean (PA)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deluzio
     DeSaulnier
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Fitzpatrick
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Foushee
     Frankel, Lois
     Frost
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Garcia, Robert
     Goldman (NY)
     Gomez
     Gonzalez, Vicente
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Grijalva
     Harder (CA)
     Hayes
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Hoyle (OR)
     Ivey
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson (NC)
     Jackson Lee
     Jacobs
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Kamlager-Dove
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim (NJ)
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     Landsman
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Lee (PA)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lynch
     Magaziner
     Manning
     Matsui
     McBath
     McClellan
     McCollum
     McGarvey
     McGovern
     Meeks
     Menendez
     Meng
     Mfume
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moskowitz
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Mullin
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Nickel
     Norcross
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peltola
     Perez
     Peters
     Pettersen
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Quigley
     Ramirez
     Raskin
     Ross
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan
     Salinas
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Scholten
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Slotkin
     Smith (WA)
     Sorensen
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Stansbury
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Strickland
     Swalwell
     Sykes
     Takano
     Thanedar
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tokuda
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres (NY)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Underwood
     Vargas
     Vasquez
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Wexton
     Wild
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Buchanan
     Gallego
     Huffman
     Williams (NY)

                              {time}  1523

  Mr. McHENRY changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the joint resolution was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.


                          personal explanation

  Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted 
``nay'' on rollcall No. 380, ``nay'' on rollcall No. 381, and ``nay'' 
on rollcall No. 382.

                          ____________________