Motion to proceed to consideration of measure rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 43 - 50. Record Vote Number: 4.
This joint resolution seeks to disapprove, under the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 8), an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule that approved South Dakota’s Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the second implementation period (published at 90 Fed.
Reg. 41893 on August 28, 2025).
If enacted, the resolution would declare that the EPA rule "shall have no force or effect," nullifying the agency’s approval.
On content alone, the resolution is narrow and administratively simple — features that usually improve the odds for congressional action. Countervailing factors are the policy area (environmental regulation), the absence of compromise features, and the practical uphill climb in the Senate for disapproving agency rules. Without information on executive branch support or the broader political calculus, the content points to a modest to low likelihood of ultimately becoming law.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused Congressional Review Act disapproval of a single EPA rule. It is concise and identifies the rule precisely, producing the primary legal effect sought (nullification).
Whether congressional disapproval strengthens or weakens environmental protections: liberals see risk of weakening protections or politicization; conservatives view disapproval as a check on agency overreach.
Whether congressional disapproval strengthens or weakens environmental protections: liberals see risk of weakening protections or politicization; conservatives view disapproval as a check on agency overreach.
A mainstream liberal would likely be skeptical of using a Congressional Review Act joint resolution to nullify an EPA approval of a state regional haze plan because it appears to politicize technical environmental implementation and could weaken air-quality protections.
They would want to know whether the EPA approval ensured strong emissions controls and public-health protections; if the EPA approval was lenient, some progressives might support reversal only if it led to stricter, enforceable federal action.
Overall they will lean against congressional disapproval unless it clearly advances stronger pollution controls and environmental justice outcomes.
A centrist/technocratic responder would view the resolution with mixed instincts: they favor strong air-quality outcomes but are wary of Congress overturning a technical EPA approval without a clear, evidence-based rationale.
They would want to see the EPA’s administrative record, the specific deficiencies being alleged, and an assessment of the practical consequences (including whether nullification would improve or worsen actual emissions and compliance).
Pragmatically, they would lean toward procedural caution and demand more information before supporting a congressional override.
A mainstream conservative would generally view a congressional disapproval of an EPA rule as an acceptable check on federal regulatory power and agency decision-making.
Many conservatives favor stronger legislative oversight of independent agencies and may see CRA disapproval as a tool to prevent regulatory overreach or to rebalance federal-state authority.
They would support the resolution if they believe the EPA acted beyond statutory authority, imposed undue burdens, or prioritized uniform federal control over state flexibility.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
On content alone, the resolution is narrow and administratively simple — features that usually improve the odds for congressional action. Countervailing factors are the policy area (environmental regulation), the absence of compromise features, and the practical uphill climb in the Senate for disapproving agency rules. Without information on executive branch support or the broader political calculus, the content points to a modest to low likelihood of ultimately becoming law.
On the Motion to Proceed S.J.Res. 86
Whether congressional disapproval strengthens or weakens environmental protections: liberals see risk of weakening protections or politiciz…
On content alone, the resolution is narrow and administratively simple — features that usually improve the odds for congressional action. C…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused Congressional Review Act disapproval of a single EPA rule. It is concise and identifies the rule precisely, producing the primary legal effect s…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.