Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
This resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to nullify a federal agency guidance document. If enacted, it declares the specified CFTC guidance has no force or effect and bars the agency from issuing a substantially similar rule unless Congress passes new legislation. The joint resolution must be approved by both chambers and presented to the President to become law, subject to signature or veto.
Commission Guidance Regarding the Listing of Voluntary Carbon Credit Derivative Contracts (89 Fed. Reg. 83378, October 15, 2024).
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)
Under the Congressional Review Act, disapproval resolutions in the Senate are considered under expedited procedures with limited debate and require a simple majority for passage, so they are not subject to filibuster; a joint resolution still must pass both chambers and be presented to the President to take effect.
This joint resolution (S.J. Res. 9) would use the Congressional Review Act to disapprove and void the Commodity Futures Trading Commissions final guidance titled "Commission Guidance Regarding the Listing of Voluntary Carbon Credit Derivative Contracts" (89 Fed.
Reg. 83378, Oct. 15, 2024).
If enacted, the guidance would have no force or effect.
Very narrow, low-cost deregulatory action that is ideologically charged; success depends heavily on which congressional majority and executive stance prevail.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused Congressional Review Act resolution that clearly identifies and nullifies a single agency guidance instrument. It uses the standard, concise statutory form to achieve that substantive regulatory change.
Progressives emphasize climate finance and oversight; opposes nullification.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize climate finance and oversight; opposes nullification.
Likely opposes the resolution.
Progressives would view CFTC guidance as a needed step toward standardized, regulated voluntary carbon derivatives and market oversight, and see nullification as hindering climate finance and transparency.
They might nevertheless call for stronger integrity safeguards for carbon credits rather than outright disapproval.
Mixed/ambivalent.
A centrist will acknowledge the value of Congressional review but worry a blunt disapproval could create market uncertainty.
They would prefer clarifying or improving the guidance through technical fixes or a measured pause for fuller rulemaking rather than immediate nullification.
Likely supports the resolution.
Mainstream conservatives would see disapproval as checking perceived regulatory overreach and preventing government-enabled expansion of ESG/climate finance via derivatives.
They would favor limiting agency discretion and preserving market integrity against speculative carbon products.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Very narrow, low-cost deregulatory action that is ideologically charged; success depends heavily on which congressional majority and executive stance prevail.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize climate finance and oversight; opposes nullification.
Very narrow, low-cost deregulatory action that is ideologically charged; success depends heavily on which congressional majority and execut…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused Congressional Review Act resolution that clearly identifies and nullifies a single agency guidance instrument. It uses the standard, concise sta…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.