|
1. Clean
Air & Clean Water/Restore Funds for EPA Enforcement: Enforcement
is a vital component of any environmental law. In the same way that
drivers are more likely to speed down the road if they know no police
officer is present, polluters often break the law when they think
they can get away with it. Violations of the Clean Water Act and
Clean Air Act are still pervasive and severe, inspections are too
infrequent, and resource constraints are a significant factor preventing
the situation from improving. When President Bush's budget, as introduced
in the House, called for an additional $25 million reduction in
enforcement dollars at the federal level, Rep. Menendez (D-NJ) introduced
an amendment to restore the funding. On July 27, 2001 the House
voted 182-214 against Rep. Menendez’s amendment to restore environmental
enforcement funding. (Roll Call #289) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: YES
2. Clean
Water/Reduce Arsenic in Drinking Water: More than 30 million
people in the nation drink water with dangerous levels of arsenic.
Arsenic can cause cancer of the skin, bladder, and lungs, and may
cause cancers of the liver, kidney, and colon. Arsenic also may
harm the nervous, immunological, pulmonary, cardiovascular, developmental
and reproductive systems. In January 2001, after decades of study,
debate, and three missed statutory deadlines, EPA lowered the legal
limit of arsenic in tap water from 50 parts per billion (ppb), set
in 1942, to 10 ppb. However, on May 22, 2001, EPA delayed the rule
until February 22, 2002 and asked the National Academy of Sciences
to review the science on arsenic’s health effects. The NAS confirmed
that arsenic is a dangerous substance that causes cancer at very
low levels and that it is related to a variety of non-cancer health
impacts. Reps. Waxman (D-CA), Bonior (D-MI), and Brown (D-OH) offered
an amendment to force the EPA to restore the 10 ppb standard. On
July 27, 2001, the House passed the amendment 218-189. (Roll Call
#288) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: YES
3. Clean
Water/Stop Rollback of Toxic Mining Pollution Rule: In January
2001, after years of study and public comment, the Department of
the Interior issued new regulations to limit the impacts of hardrock
mining. Mining has polluted 40% of Western watersheds with toxins
such as arsenic and cyanide and left a legacy of dozens of polluted
Superfund sites. After the regulations were issued, Interior Secretary
Gale Norton moved to suspend the regulations, citing industry concerns.
Reps. Inslee (D-WA) and Horn (R-CA) offered an amendment to H.R.
2217, the Fiscal Year 2002 House Interior Appropriations bill, to
block the Interior Department from rolling back the newly issued
mining regulations. On June 21, 2001, the House of Representatives
approved the amendment by a 216-194 vote. (Roll Call #182) PUBLIC
INTEREST VOTE: YES
4. Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge/Oppose Drilling in Arctic Refuge: The
House energy bill that went to the floor on July 27, 2001 included
language allowing oil and gas drilling and development in the coastal
plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, one of America's last
wild places. Arctic champions Reps. Markey (DMA) and Nancy Johnson
(R-CT) offered an amendment stripping the Arctic Refuge drilling
language out of the House energy bill, keeping the coastal plain
of the Arctic Refuge off limits to oil and gas drilling. On August
1, 2001, the House rejected the amendment 206-223. (Roll Call #317)
PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: YES
5. Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge/Oppose Drilling in 2,000 Acres of Refuge:
Rep. Sununu (R-NH) and other proponents of drilling offered an amendment
claiming to limit drilling to 2,000 acres of the coastal plain of
the Arctic Refuge as a way of picking up support from moderate members
of Congress. Their claim that drilling activities would be limited
to 2,000 acres was misleading, as it exempted gravel roads, ice
roads, and pipelines associated with developing an oil field. On
August 1, 2001, the House approved the amendment 228-201. (Roll
Call #316) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: NO
6. Clean
Energy/Oppose Dirty, Dangerous Energy Bill: The House passed
energy legislation that is dirty, dangerous and doesn't deliver
for consumers. It is a recipe for more drilling, more spilling,
more asthma attacks, more nuclear waste, and more global warming.
The energy bill allows drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge, gives away more than $27 billion in taxpayer handouts to
polluters, and rewards the polluting oil, coal and nuclear companies
who have created energy problems. The House energy bill does little
to ensure energy efficiency -- the cleanest, cheapest, quickest
and safest way to save consumers money and reduce pollution. This
bill does not require a significant shift to clean, renewable energy
production, which could make us less reliant on fossil fuels. By
weakening public lands protections, the bill will help to destroy
sensitive public lands. On August 2, 2001, the House passed the
energy bill 240-189. (Roll Call #320) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: NO
7. Clean
Energy/Shift $52 Million Fossil Fuel Subsidy to Energy Efficiency:
The burning of coal and oil is a major source of smog forming nitrogen
oxide, soot producing sulfur dioxide, the global warming gas carbon
dioxide, and toxic mercury. Yet, every year, coal and oil companies
receive hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies to continue
producing these dirty energy sources. Reps. Sanders (I-VT), Quinn
(R-NY), Oberstar (D-MN), Gilman (R-NY), Blumenauer (D-OR) and Kind
(D-WI) offered an amendment to shift $52 million from the fossil
fuel industry to energy efficiency. On June 21, 2001, the House
rejected the amendment 153-262. (Roll Call #178) PUBLIC INTEREST
VOTE: YES
8. Global
Warming/Energy Efficiency/Increase Auto Fuel Economy Standards:
In order to curb our dependence on foreign oil, we must reduce our
consumption over-all. Since cars and light trucks account for 40%
of all petroleum use in the U.S., the best way to cut our dependence
on oil is to make vehicles go farther on a gallon of gas. Unfortunately,
fuel economy has reached an all-time low because gas-guzzling SUVs
are allowed to meet weaker fuel economy standards than cars. Reps.
Boehlert (R-NY) and Markey (DMA) introduced an amendment that would
have required SUVs and other light trucks to meet the same fuel
economy standards as automobiles, saving consumers $16 billion at
the pump by 2015. On August 1, 2001 the House rejected the amendment
160-269. (Roll Call #311) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: YES
9. Safe Food/Stop
Government Approval of Genetically Engineered Fish: Genetically
engineered fish pose significant human health and environmental
risks. A petition is currently pending at the Food and Drug Administration
for a genetically engineered salmon that grows faster than its conventional
counterpart. Although FDA is the federal agency with expertise in
food safety, its failure to require mandatory safety testing for
genetically engineered crops demonstrates a lack of rigor in oversight
for this radical new technology. Because the fish are being regulated
as a drug, the public will have no input or ability to review data
until after FDA has made a final decision. In addition to human
health concerns, research has demonstrated that genetically engineered
fish can quickly drive native fish species to extinction if they
escape from pens, a regular occurrence. FDA has no expertise in
the environmental area and has failed to consult with other agencies
that do, such as the Fish and Wildlife Service. Reps. Kucinich (D-OH)
and DeFazio (D-OR) offered an amendment that would have prohibited
FDA from granting approval for genetically engineered fish for one
year while fundamental scientific questions, as yet unanswered,
were researched. On July 11, 2002, the amendment was defeated 145-279.
(Roll Call #218) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: YES
10. Environmental
Preservation/Oppose Drilling in National Monuments: Some of
the nation’s most spectacular places have been granted special status
as National Monuments under the Antiquities Act, which allows the
president to provide protections to objects of important natural,
historic, or scientific value. Treasured places like the Grand Canyon
were protected as National Monuments when they were most vulnerable.
Unfortunately, President Bush and Interior Secretary Gale Norton
announced that they would consider the allowing oil and gas drilling
and other reckless development on these fragile lands, threatening
the integrity of these national treasures. During House consideration
of H.R. 2217, the Fiscal Year 2002 Interior Appropriations bill,
Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV) introduced an amendment to prohibit Interior
Secretary Norton from issuing any oil, gas, coal or geothermal leases
in any national monument. On June 21, 2001, the House approved the
Rahall amendment 242-173. (Roll Call #180) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE:
YES
11. Environmental
Preservation/Increase Funding for Farmland Conservation: Farming
and ranching operations occupy more than half the land in the 48
contiguous United States. We must conserve this land in order to
keep our water clean, preserve our open spaces, maintain local sources
of nutritious food, and protect wildlife habitat. During consideration
of the House farm bill, H.R. 2646, Reps. Boehlert (R-NY), Kind (D-WI),
Gilchrest (R-MD), and Dingell (D-MI) introduced an amendment to
provide $5.4 billion a year for agricultural conservation programs
over the next 10 years. On October 4, 2001, the House rejected the
amendment by a 200-226 vote. (Roll Call #366) PUBLIC INTEREST
VOTE: YES
12. Environmental
Preservation/Oppose Drilling off Florida Coast: The Florida
coastline dominates the geography of the eastern Gulf and is the
vacation and recreation destination for millions of Americans. Unfortunately,
off-shore oil and gas drilling threatens the precious coastline
with routine pollution and increases the risk of a damaging deepwater
oil spill. In order to protect the eastern Gulf of Mexico from harmful
offshore oil and gas drilling, Reps. Davis (D-FL) and Scarborough
(R-FL) offered an amendment during consideration of H.R. 2217, the
Interior Appropriations bill. This amendment would delay oil and
gas leasing off Florida's sensitive coastline. On June 21, 2001,
the House approved the Davis-Scarborough amendment 247-164. See
Senate Scorecard vote #9 for more information. (Roll Call #181)
PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: YES
13. Environmental
Preservation/Oppose Drilling in Great Lakes: The Great Lakes
contain 20% of all the fresh water in the entire world, yet last
year numerous attempts were made to expand so-called “directional
drilling” under the bed of the Great Lakes, jeopardizing the shoreline,
surrounding wetlands, and the waters of the Great Lakes themselves.
During consideration of H.R. 2311, the Energy and Water Development
Appropriations bill, Reps. Bonior (D-MI), Stupak (D-MI), Kaptur
(D-OH), and La-Tourette (R-OH) introduced an amendment to protect
the Great Lakes region from the environmental harm caused by oil
and gas drilling. Specifically, the amendment would prohibit the
Army Corps of Engineers from spending federal funds to issue any
new permits for oil or gas drilling from land beneath the water
in any of the Great Lakes, as well as in Lake Saint Clair, the Saint
Mary's River, the Saint Clair River, the Detroit River, the Niagara
River, or the Saint Lawrence River from Lake Ontario to the 45th
parallel of latitude. On June 28, 2001, the House approved the amendment
265-157. (Roll Call #203) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: YES
14. Health
Care/Oppose Weakening Patients’ Bill of Rights: In the previous
Congress, Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-GA) had championed bipartisan
patients’ bill of rights legislation guaranteeing consumers a strong
right to sue their HMO. However, Norwood changed his position and
backed a weaker proposal negotiated with President Bush to gut the
pro-consumer bill, H.R. 2563, sponsored by Reps. Ganske (D-IA) and
Dingell (D-MI). On August 2, 2001, the House voted 218-213 to approve
the Norwood amendment to H.R. 2563, limiting the right of patients
to sue their HMO. (Roll Call #329) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: NO
15. Higher
Education/Lower the Cost of Student Loans: Sen. Johnson (D-SD)
introduced S. 1762, the student loan interest rate bill, to lower
the cost of federal student education loans. The bill will make
a college education more affordable for millions of Americans, saving
the typical borrower almost $700 over the life of his/her loan.
As tuition costs rise, federal financial aid fails to keep pace,
and state budgets shrink, increasing numbers of students are turning
to loans as the primary mechanism to finance a college education.
The typical student graduates with almost $17,000 in federal student
loan debt. One third of all seniors will graduate with more than
$20,000 in student loan debt. S.1762 is a key step to ensuring that
college is affordable for the average American. On January 24, 2002,
the House passed the Senate bill by a vote of 372-3. (Roll Call
#4) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: YES
16. Campaign
Finance Reform/Oppose Doubling Contribution Limits: During the
House debate on campaign finance reform, Rep. Wamp (R-TN) offered
an amendment to the Shays-Meehan bill that increased the current
limit on contributions to candidates running for seats in the U.S.
House of Representatives from $1,000 to $2,000. This only further
increases the amounts that candidates can raise from wealthy donors
and gives special interests even more influence in determining who
runs for office and who wins elections. On February 13, 2002, the
House adopted the amendment 218-211. (Roll Call #28) PUBLIC INTEREST
VOTE: NO
17. Election
Reform/Protect Voters’ Rights, Improve Access to Polls: The
House election reform bill, sponsored by Reps. Ney (R-OH) and Hoyer
(D-MD), included a major rollback of the “Motor-Voter” law and fell
short in other areas. The National Voter Registration Act (often
called “Motor-Voter”) ensures that registered voters are not removed
from the rolls simply because they have not voted recently. States
must have a reason to believe that a voter is no longer eligible
before initiating the “purging” process— and even in this case,
there is a fail-safe mechanism to correct errors at the polls. The
Ney-Hoyer bill turns this protection on its head, permitting states
to purge anyone who misses two successive federal elections and
does not respond to a notice. This provision would result in the
purging of many eligible and properly registered voters. Before
the House voted on the bill, Rep. Menendez (D-NJ) introduced a motion
to recommit, which would have sent the bill back to committee with
instructions to include language that would have removed the harmful
voter protection rollback, improved accessibility for disabled voters,
and made other important improvements. On December 12, 2001, the
House rejected the motion to recommit 197-226. (Roll Call #488)
PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: YES
18. Consumer
Protection/Oppose Weakening Consumer Bankruptcy Protections:
Despite independent research showing that most bankruptcies are
the result of job layoffs, divorce, or sudden illness, the House
passed one-sided legislation backed forcefully by the credit card
industry that will restrict the ability of financially strapped
consumers to make a fresh start in bankruptcy without The bill imposes
a rigid new means test on debtors seeking to file for Chapter 7
"fresh-start" bankruptcy, unfairly forcing many consumers into Chapter
13 "5-year repayment plans." The bill also creates onerous legal
and paperwork burdens for debtors of modest means while continuing
to allow affluent debtors in some states to file for bankruptcy
protection and retain expensive homes. Furthermore, it does virtually
nothing to rein in abusive creditor practices that help lead consumers
into insupportable debt. On March 1, 2001, the House approved the
bankruptcy bill, H. R. 333, by a vote of 306-108. (Roll Call #25)
PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: NO
19. Consumer
Protection/Oppose Weakening Consumer Legal Rights: The House
passed H.R. 2341, the falsely-labeled "Class Action Fairness Act,"
which makes it harder for consumers victimized by dangerous products
or unfair financial practices to band together into a group, or
class, to sue wrongdoers. Class action lawsuits are an especially
effective consumer tool for victims of "nickel, dime and dollar"
rip-offs, such as unfair credit card practices, where individuals
cannot afford their own attorneys. Although individual claims are
small, the total rip-offs amount to millions of dollars. This bill
would force most class actions out of consumer-friendly state courts
and into more-restrictive federal courts where corporate defendants
can take advantage of federal court procedures to delay and weaken
cases against them. On March 13, 2002, the House passed H.R. 2341
by a vote of 233-190. (Roll Call #62) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: NO
20. Fair
Trade/Stop Anti-Consumer, Anti-Environmental Trade Agreements: International
trade agreements are quickly becoming vehicles for large, multinational
corporations to challenge environmental and consumer protections
as "barriers to free trade." There have been several lawsuits filed
by large corporations seeking to overturn bans on hazardous chemicals
and local decisions on waste dumps under current free trade agreements.
The House voted on a bill to give the President virtually unfettered
ability to negotiate additional trade agreements with no protections
for the environment. The bill also contains a specific provision
that declares consumer labeling of food products a barrier to trade.
On December 6, 2001, the House voted to pass the bill 215-214. (Roll
Call #481) PUBLIC INTEREST VOTE: NO
Note: The Speaker
of the House votes at his discretion.
|