[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.
____________________