III 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 25 

Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should submit the Paris 

climate change agreement to the Senate for its advice and consent. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 19, 2015 

Mr. LEE (for himself, Mr. COTTON, Mr. CRUZ, Mr. VITTER, Mr. SHELBY, Mr. 

THUNE, Mr. SCOTT, Mr. WICKER, Mr. HATCH, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. 

BLUNT, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. ROUNDS, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. 

COCHRAN, Mr. TILLIS, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. COATS, Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. 

CRAPO, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. SASSE, Mr. DAINES, Mr. 

TOOMEY, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. PAUL, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. ENZI, and Mr. 

CORNYN) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should 

submit the Paris climate change agreement to the Senate 

for its advice and consent. 

Whereas the United States is party to the United Nations 

Framework Convention on Climate Change, with annexes, done at New York May 9, 1992, and entered into 

force March 21, 1994 (in this resolution referred to as 

the ‘‘Convention’’); 

Whereas the Convention requires the United States to ‘‘adopt 

national policies and take corresponding measures on the 

mitigation of climate change, by limiting its anthropoVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:22 Nov 20, 2015 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\SC25.IS SC25

smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SCON 25 IS 

genic emissions of greenhouse gases,’’ but does not require the United States to commit to specific targets or 

timetables for emissions reductions; 

Whereas, during the Convention’s advice and consent process 

in the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate (in 

this resolution referred to as the ‘‘Foreign Relations 

Committee’’) a question arose whether future protocols 

made pursuant to the Convention ‘‘containing targets 

and timetables’’ for emissions reductions should be submitted to the Senate for advice and consent; 

Whereas the Foreign Relations Committee submitted a written question, ‘‘Would a protocol containing targets and 

timetables be submitted to the Senate?’’ to which the Executive Branch responded, ‘‘If such a protocol were negotiated and adopted, and the United States wished to become a party, we would expect such a protocol to be submitted to the Senate.’’; 

Whereas the Foreign Relations Committee, chaired by Senator Claiborne Pell, issued Executive Report 102–55 regarding the Convention in which it noted ‘‘that a decision 

by the Conference of the Parties to adopt targets and 

timetables would have to be submitted to the Senate for 

its advice and consent before the United States could deposit its instruments of ratification for such an agreement’’; 

Whereas Executive Report 102–55 further noted ‘‘that a decision by the executive branch to reinterpret the Convention to apply legally binding targets and timetables for 

reducing emissions of greenhouse gases to the United 

States would alter the ‘shared understanding’ of the Convention between the Senate and the executive branch and 

would therefore require the Senate’s advice and consent’’; 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•SCON 25 IS 

Whereas, under the auspices given by the Executive Branch 

that future agreements made pursuant to the Convention 

containing targets and timetables for emissions reductions would be submitted to the Senate, the Senate gave 

its consent to ratification of the Convention on October 

7, 1992; 

Whereas, in December 2011, at the seventeenth session of 

the Conference of the Parties (COP–17) in Durban, 

South Africa, the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban 

Platform for Enhanced Action was established, inter alia, 

‘‘to develop a protocol, another legal instrument or an 

agreed outcome with legal force’’ under the Convention to 

be completed no later than 2015 and adopted at the 

twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties 

(COP–21); 

Whereas, subsequent to COP–17, representatives of President 

Barack Obama, including the Special Envoy for Climate 

Change, have made public statements indicating that the 

United States intends to finalize a climate change agreement at COP–21 that contains targets and timetables for 

emissions reductions; 

Whereas the Executive Branch has made clear through its 

public statements that it intends to negotiate a climate 

change agreement at COP–21 that contains legally binding provisions as well as nonbinding provisions—including targets and timetables for emissions reductions—attached as an addendum or schedule to the legally binding 

agreement; 

Whereas the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Laurent 

Fabius, who will host COP–21, has stated, ‘‘We must 

find a formula which is valuable for everybody and valuable for the U.S. without going to the Congress.’’; 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•SCON 25 IS 

Whereas the Department of State developed guidelines known 

as the Circular 175 Procedure (C–175) to facilitate ‘‘the 

application of orderly and uniform measures to the negotiation, conclusion, reporting, publication, and registration of U.S. treaties and international agreements’’; 

Whereas C–175, inter alia, set forth eight factors for determining ‘‘whether any international agreement should be 

brought into force as a treaty or as an international 

agreement other than a treaty’’; 

Whereas the Executive Branch must give ‘‘due consideration’’ 

to the eight factors outlined in C–175, and ‘‘the utmost 

care is to be exercised to avoid any invasion or compromise of the constitutional powers of the President, the 

Senate, and the Congress as a whole’’; 

Whereas the eight factors are as follows: (1) the extent to 

which the agreement involves commitments or risks affecting the Nation as a whole; (2) whether the agreement 

is intended to affect State laws; (3) whether the agreement can be given effect without the enactment of subsequent legislation by the Congress; (4) past United States 

practice as to similar agreements; (5) the preference of 

the Congress as to a particular type of agreement; (6) 

the degree of formality desired for an agreement; (7) the 

proposed duration of the agreement, the need for prompt 

conclusion of an agreement, and the desirability of concluding a routine or short-term agreement; and (8) the 

general international practice as to similar agreements; 

Whereas COP–21 will be held in Paris, France, from November 30 to December 11, 2015; 

Whereas, at COP–21, the United States will be expected, 

inter alia, to commit billions of dollars in taxpayer money 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
5 

•SCON 25 IS 

to fund the Green Climate Fund and other financial 

mechanisms to fund mitigation and adaptation projects 

in developing countries; 

Whereas the Paris climate change agreement, either in the 

form contemplated by the President or in its current 

draft form released on October 5, 2015, by the Ad Hoc 

Working Group on the Durban Platform, reflects the 

characteristics of a treaty as set forth in C–175, and 

does not reflect the characteristics of an international 

agreement other than a treaty; and 

Whereas, pursuant to commitments made by the Executive 

Branch to the Senate during the advice and consent process for the Convention the Executive Branch stated that 

any protocol containing targets and timetables would be 

submitted to the Senate: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that— 

3 (1) the statements made by the Executive 

4 Branch to the Senate during Senate consideration of 

5 the Convention and set forth in Executive Report 

6 102–55 remain valid and in force and, accordingly, 

7 any agreement adopted at COP–21 containing tar8 gets and timetables, whether deemed ‘‘legally bind9 ing’’ or not, must be submitted to the Senate for ad10 vice and consent pursuant to Article II, section 2 of 

11 the Constitution; 

12 (2) any agreement or decision made at COP–21 

13 that contains targets and timetables—whether they 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
6 

•SCON 25 IS 

1 are contained within a legally binding instrument or 

2 attached as a nonbinding schedule or addendum to 

3 a legally binding instrument—shall be considered by 

4 the Congress to be an agreement ‘‘containing targets 

5 and timetables’’; 

6 (3) a decision by the Executive Branch made at 

7 COP–21 or any other venue to apply targets and 

8 timetables for reducing emissions of greenhouse 

9 gases to the United States would alter the ‘‘shared 

10 understanding’’ of the Convention between the Exec11 utive Branch and the Senate and would therefore re12 quire the Senate’s advice and consent; 

13 (4) the Department of State developed the 

14 ‘‘Circular 175 Procedure’’ to determine how inter15 national agreements would be negotiated, and the 

16 eight factors contained in the Procedure strongly 

17 support the conclusion that any agreement made 

18 under the Convention that contains targets and 

19 timetables for reducing emissions of greenhouse 

20 gases must be submitted to the Senate for advice 

21 and consent; 

22 (5) until all commitments on emissions targets 

23 and timetables made at COP–21 are submitted to 

24 the Senate for advice and consent and subsequently 

25 ratified by the Executive Branch, such commitments 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
7 

•SCON 25 IS 

1 shall have no effect on the interpretation of United 

2 States law or the international obligations of the 

3 United States; and 

4 (6) Congress should refuse to consider any 

5 budget resolutions and appropriations language that 

6 include funding for the Green Climate Fund or any 

7 affiliated body or financing mechanism unless and 

8 until all agreements on emissions targets and time9 tables reached at COP–21 are submitted to the Sen10 ate for advice and consent. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS