Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
This resolution is a nonbinding statement from Congress urging the Senate to give advice and consent to ratify the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. It does not itself ratify the treaty, change U.S. law, or require the President to act. Instead, it expresses the House's view that ratification is in the national interest and asks the Senate to take up the treaty.
Concurrent resolutions must be approved by both the House and the Senate to reflect a joint congressional position, but they are not sent to the President and do not create binding law. This measure is an expression of opinion and an urging for Senate action, not a treaty ratification or new legal requirement.
This concurrent resolution urges the Senate to give advice and consent to U.S. ratification of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
It notes global biodiversity loss, that the United States signed the CBD in 1993 but has not ratified, and argues U.S. absence reduces American influence in CBD decision-making.
The text states current U.S. domestic law already aligns with CBD obligations and frames ratification as in the national interest.
The resolution itself is easy to pass, but securing Senate two‑thirds advice and consent for CBD ratification faces high political and procedural hurdles.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well‑formed symbolic/expressive concurrent resolution that clearly articulates the issue and requests the Senate provide advice and consent to ratify the Convention on Biological Diversity. It situates the request with factual context about U.S. signature and domestic compliance.
Support for multilateral leadership versus concerns about sovereignty
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Support for multilateral leadership versus concerns about sovereignty
Likely strongly supportive: ratification restores U.S. voice in international biodiversity governance and signals climate and conservation leadership.
They will push for federal funding, stronger implementation, and protections for environmental justice and Indigenous rights.
Generally supportive but pragmatic: favors regaining U.S. influence while insisting on legal review and clarity about obligations and costs.
Would seek Senate reservations and Congressional oversight to limit unforeseen impacts.
Likely opposed or skeptical: sees risks to sovereignty, private property, and regulatory expansion.
Some conservatives might accept ratification only with strong, explicit reservations and implementing legislation limiting federal power.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
The resolution itself is easy to pass, but securing Senate two‑thirds advice and consent for CBD ratification faces high political and procedural hurdles.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Support for multilateral leadership versus concerns about sovereignty
The resolution itself is easy to pass, but securing Senate two‑thirds advice and consent for CBD ratification faces high political and proc…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well‑formed symbolic/expressive concurrent resolution that clearly articulates the issue and requests the Senate provide advice and consent to ratify the Convent…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.