Bill · S.J.Res. 69· Senate(119-SJRES-69)
A joint resolution 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 "Record of Decision for the Barred Owl Management Strategy; Washington, Oregon, and California".
- Introduced
- 7/24/2025
- Last activity
- 10/29/2025 — Motion to proceed to consideration of measure rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 25 - 72. Record Vote Number: 597.
- Sponsored by
- John Kennedy
- Cosponsors
- - 5 - 0
- Introduced
What this bill would do
This joint resolution seeks to overturn a specific rule issued by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The rule in question involves the "Record of Decision for the Barred Owl Management Strategy" for Washington, Oregon, and California. The resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to express disapproval of this rule. If passed, the resolution dictates that the rule shall have no force or effect.
Yes
Does this leave more decisions to the states?+3
By overturning a federal agency rule, the resolution reduces federal administrative authority over wildlife management.
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?+2
The removal of federal wildlife management strategies may reduce regulatory burdens on land use in the affected regions.
The opposite
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?-5
The resolution nullifies a management strategy intended to manage barred owl populations, which could impact ecosystem stability.
What Congress actually voted on
One recorded vote has been taken on this bill.
None of them settled the bill — every vote so far has been about whether to keep going.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Nullification of the Rule: By declaring the rule shall have no force or effect, the resolution effectively stops the implementation of the "Record of Decision for the Barred Owl Management Strategy; Washington, Oregon, and California" (S. J. RES. 69).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No information provided: The provided text does not contain specific details regarding the actual contents or requirements of the Fish and Wildlife Service rule itself, only the intent to disapprove it. Therefore, I cannot identify specific negative consequences or burdens that would result from the rule's implementation or its disapproval based strictly on this text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Improves Environmental Protections-5
- Governance And Ideology
- Increase States Rights+3
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Rural Residents+2
- 10/29/2025
- Motion to proceed to consideration of measure rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 25 - 72. Record Vote Number: 597.
- 10/15/2025
- Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works discharged, by petition, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 802(c).
- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 190.
- 10/9/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/3/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/2/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/29/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/24/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Marsha BlackburnRepublican · Tennessee
Katie BrittRepublican · Alabama
James LankfordRepublican · Oklahoma
Rand PaulRepublican · Kentucky
Rick ScottRepublican · Florida