Thune: Senate Will Determine Future of Biden’s California EV Mandate
“The situation we’re facing today is an agency submitting to the Senate actions that the agency says are rules, and GAO - for the first time in history - inserting itself into the situation and offering its own opinion that the rules in question are not in fact rules.”
Click here to watch the video.
WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) today delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor:
Thune’s remarks below (as delivered):
“Madam President, we’re facing a novel situation here in the Senate.
“And for the sake of my Democrat colleagues, who seem more than a little confused as to what’s going on here, let me just review the situation.
“We have received from the House joint resolutions of disapproval that meet all the statutory requirements under Chapter 8, Title 5, of the U.S. Code, the Congressional Review Act.
“In the past the Senate has treated any such joint resolution as being eligible for expedited floor consideration procedures prescribed under the Congressional Review Act.
“But here’s the twist …
“Senate Democrats claim that we can’t consider these resolutions under these Congressional Review Act procedures, because the rules addressed in the resolutions in question are not in fact rules.
“Now, the rules in question – the California waiver rules – were submitted to Congress as rules, which has always been all the Senate needed to consider something as eligible for consideration under the Congressional Review Act.
“And they are clearly rules in substance, given their nationwide impact and scope.
“But in an unprecedented move, the Government Accountability Office has inserted itself into this situation and declared that these rules submitted to Congress by the EPA as rules … are not in fact rules.
“Now, Madam President, for years the Senate has turned to the Government Accountability Office – the GAO – to determine if something not submitted by an agency is actually a rule that should have been submitted to Congress as such.
“That’s not part of the Congressional Review Act statute, but the Senate has relied on GAO for this to prevent agencies from flouting the law and ignoring Congress’ statutory right to review agency rulemaking.
“In other words, GAO has acted as a failsafe to ensure Congress’ rights are protected from encroachment by the executive branch.
“That is not the situation we find ourselves in today.
“In fact, it’s the inverse.
“The situation we’re facing today is an agency submitting to the Senate actions that the agency says are rules, and GAO – for the first time in history – inserting itself into the situation and offering its own opinion that the rules in question are not in fact rules.
“Well, so what do we do about this?
“I believe that when the Senate is facing a novel situation like this one, with disagreement among its members, it is appropriate for the Senate to speak as a body to the question – something the Senate does when questions over application of the rules arise.
“For example, just last year a Republican member of the Senate brought a resolution to the floor under a fast-track procedure, the War Powers Act, and a Democrat member of the Senate argued that it was not entitled to those procedures.
“He then made a point of order to that effect, and the chair submitted the question to the Senate.
“And the Senate voted on what qualifies for that fast-track procedure.
“That is what we are doing today.
“Nobody at the time cried nuclear, nobody said the Democrat member was blowing up the Senate – in fact, most members probably don’t even remember the situation, because it was just the Senate doing what the Senate is supposed to do, and that’s voting on how to apply the rules when faced with a new situation.
“Madam President, I think at this point it should be abundantly clear that what we’re doing has nothing to do with the legislative filibuster.
“But while I’d love to think that reality would prevail, I fully expect Democrats to continue to misrepresent the situation.
“And I think there are probably multiple reasons for that.
“One is that I think a lot of Democrats support an electric vehicle mandate, and are perfectly happy to allow California to set an EV mandate for the whole country.
“In fact, I think they’re somewhat frantic at the prospect of losing this Green New Deal policy.
“And two, I suspect Democrats are trying to use this situation as cover to justify abolishing the filibuster next time they’re in charge.
“I think they think they can make dismantling the Senate filibuster a lot more palatable by claiming – however mendaciously – that Republicans attacked it first.
“Madam President, I would love to believe – I would love to believe – that Democrats have suddenly come to a realization of the importance of the legislative filibuster – no matter how misplaced their concerns would be in this particular instance.
“I think there is perhaps no Senate rule today that does more to preserve the character of the Senate as developed by our founders.
“And there is nothing I would like more than to see Democrats recognize this.
“But despite the rank hypocrisy the Democrats have displayed by embracing the use of the filibuster this Congress, repeatedly – after campaigning to overturn it mere months ago – I suspect that their newfound enthusiasm for the filibuster is situational-only: something to be used when it helps them and to be destroyed when it doesn’t.
“And, as I said, I strongly suspect that they are attempting to use this situation as cover for destroying the filibuster the next time they’re in power.
“Hence the misrepresentations and hysteria.
“Madam President, I can’t control what Democrats will do the next time they take the majority here in the Senate – although if they attempt to abolish the legislative filibuster and destroy the institution of the Senate, I can safely promise to fight them on it tooth and nail.
“But I can say this:
“While Republicans are in charge, the legislative filibuster will remain in place.
“And you can take that to the bank.”
Related Issues: Filibuster, Congressional Review Act
Previous
