1 - The House of Representatives budget for Fiscal Year 2002 reduced funding for natural resources and environmental programs by $2.1 billion from the previous year. This funding level would fail to provide adequate funding for protection of our natural resources, air, water, oceans, coasts, parks, open spaces, wild places and our endangered and threatened species. The Spratt Amendment alternative would have restored these cuts, increased funding by $1.5 billion, and, over the next 10 years, would have provided 20% more total funding than the Committee's Budget Resolution. The Spratt amendment to the Fiscal Year 2002 budget (H. Con. Res. 83) failed in the House of Representatives 183 to 243 on March 28, 2001. YES was the pro-environment vote. ALL SIX MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO.
2 - Rapid population growth is one of the leading contributors to environmental degradation around the world. The best way to address this problem is through voluntary family planning programs that empower couples to make their own choices about the size and spacing of their families. These programs work best when they are responsive to the needs and concerns of the women and families they serve, and one of the most important components of a successful family planning program is providing clients with complete and accurate information about their choices. The global gag rule undermines the ability of family planning providers to provide that information by restricting the activities of family planning organizations which receive U.S. funding. On May 16, 2001, the House approved an amendment to the Foreign Relations Authorization Act (H.R. 1646) to maintain the global gag rule, which restricts the actions of overseas family planning programs. This amendment, introduced by Representative Henry Hyde (R-IL), passed by a vote of 218 to 210. A NO vote was the pro-environment vote. ALL SIX MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED YES.
3 - On June 21, 2001, the House of Representatives voted 242 - 173 to protect national monuments when it approved an amendment to the Interior Department and related agencies funding bill (H.R. 2217). Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV) offered an amendment to prohibit federal land management agencies from spending any money on activities related to oil and gas drilling and coal mining in our National Monuments. As part of its "drill, dig and destroy" approach to energy development, the Bush Administration has targeted our National Monuments for destructive oil and gas development and coal mining. The Rahall amendment would essentially bar the Administration from opening up these protected areas to energy development activities for the next fiscal year, except where such activities are already allowed. YES was the pro-environment vote. Northup and Lucas voted YES; Whitfield, Lewis, Rogers, & Fletcher voted NO.
4 - On June 21, 2001, the House of Representatives passed an amendment (H.AMDT. 108 to HR 2217) that kept in place critical protection against pollution from mines. Early in 2001, the Clinton Administration put in place new regulations for hardrock mining to replace antiquated rules that hadn't been revisited in decades. These reasonable new rules required mining companies to pay for the full cost of environmental clean-ups (instead of taxpayers, who are currently on the hook for about $1 billion in costs from currently operating mines). In addition, they established strong environmental standards to protect lakes, streams, rivers and ground water from toxic chemicals, and permitted the federal government to deny permits to mining companies whose proposals could cause "irreparable harm." The Bush Administration has proposed to suspend these rules, even after receiving more than 35,000 citizen comments in favor of the new rules (more comments than the BLM has ever received on a single issue). This victory will ensure that reasonable - and sorely needed - mining regulations are kept in place. The Inslee-Horn amendment to the Department of Interior appropriations bill (H.R. 2217) passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 216 to 194 on June 21, 2001. YES was the pro-environment vote. ALL SIX MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO.
5 - On June 21, 2001, the House approved an amendment to the Department of Interior Appropriations bill offered by Rep. Jim Davis (D-FL) and Joe Scarborough (R-FL), that would delay for one year any activities related to oil and gas exploration and development off Florida's coasts. The Bush Administration is planning to go forward with a lease sale that would allow oil companies to place drilling rigs as close as 17 miles fromPensacola's shoreline. The vast majority of Florida citizens, as well as Florida Governor Jeb Bush (R), oppose the plan.The Davis-Scarborough amendment to the Department of Interior appropriations bill (H.R. 2217) passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 264 to 164. YES was the pro-environment vote. Lucas voted YES; Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Rogers, & Fletcher voted NO.
6 - On June 28, 2001, the House approved an amendment (H. AMDT. 127) by Rep. David Bonior (D-MI), Bart Stupak (D-MI), Steven LaTourette (R-OH) and Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) to the Energy and Water Appropriations Bill that would ban oil and gas drilling beneath the Great Lakes. Millions of Americans rely on the Great Lakes for drinking water and recreation. The needless drilling would endanger this irreplaceable resource for a minimal amount of oil. The Bonior-Stupak-LaTourette-Kaptur amendment to the Energy and Water Appropriations bill (H.R. 2311) passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 265 to 157. YES was the pro-environment vote. Lucas voted YES; Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, & Rogers voted NO. Fletcher did not vote.
7 - On July 27, 2001, the House, in a 218-189 vote, approved a measure (H.AMDT. 261 to H.R. 2620) by Rep. David Bonior, D-Mich., that would prevent the EPA from weakening the drinking water standard set by the Clinton administration in January. The Clinton administration set the standard at no more than 10 parts per billion of arsenic in drinking water, compared to the current 50 ppb level set in 1942. The National Academy of Sciences in 1999 released a report calling for stricter standards, saying arsenic is a potent human carcinogen linked to lung, bladder and skin cancer. YES was the pro-environment vote. ALL SIX MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO.
8 - On July 27, 2001, the House, in a 214 - 182 vote, rejected an amendment (H.AMDT. 262 to H.R. 2620) by Rep. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) to provide additional funding for federal enforcement of environmental laws. This amendment would have blocked the Bush administration from shifting money out of EPA enforcement into state grants, a move the White House said was needed because states do most of the inspections and enforcement. YES was the pro-environment vote. ALL SIX MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO.
9 - On August 1, 2001, the House voted on an Amendment to H.R. 4, Securing America's Future Energy Act of 2001, that would have increased fuel economy standards by closing the light truck loophole that allows SUVs and other light trucks to meet a lower fuel economy (CAFE) standard than cars currently meet. The amendment would have combined light trucks and cars into one fleet that would have meet a 27.5 mpg average by 2007. This step alone would have saved 1 million barrels of oil per day and slashed global warming pollution. This was the first time since 1975, when Congress passed the fuel economy law, that the House had voted to raise the standards. The amendment offered by Representatives Boehlert (R-NY) and Markey (D-MA) failed by a vote of 160 to 269. YES was the pro-environment vote. ALL SIX MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO.
10 - On August 1, 2001, the House voted on an amendment to H.R. 4, "Securing America's Future Energy Act of 2001," that would have eliminated a provision that seeks to open the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. The amendment failed and thus, the legislation would authorize destructive oil development in the 1.5 million acre coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge home to caribou, grizzly bear and hundreds of thousands of migratory birds. 95% of Alaska's vast north slope is available for oil and gas leasing and development. The coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge represents the last 5% that remains off-limits to oil drilling. The US House of Representatives rejected, by a vote of 223-206 an amendment offered by Representatives Ed Markey (D-MA) and Nancy Johnson (R-CT) to strike the provision. YES was the pro-environment vote. ALL SIX MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO.
11 - On October 4, 2001, an amendment to the Farm Bill that would have increased financial incentives to farmers to protect wetlands, clean water and open space was offered by Representatives Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY), Ron Kind (D-WI), Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD), and John Dingell (D-MI). This amendment to H.R. 2646, the "Agricultural Act of 2001," would have moved $1.9 billion annually from commodity programs to conservation efforts to help farmers provide clean water, protect wetlands and wildlife habitat, and prevent sprawl. Conservation spending would have totaled $5.4 billion annually under the amendment. In addition, the amendment would have maintained the current law's prohibition on funding assistance for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). Instead, the House approved a 10-year, $171 billion farm bill that will primarily support the nation's largest farmers at the expense of the financially-strapped smaller farmers; provide heretofore denied federal funds to CAFOs; and underfund conservation programs that preserve farmland from sprawl, protect wetlands, and improve wildlife habitat. The Kind-Boehlert amendment to the Farm Bill (H.R.2646) was defeated by a vote of 200-226. A YES vote was the pro-environment vote. ALL SIX MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO.
12 - On October 4, 2001, an amendment to the Farm Bill (H.R. 2646) that would reduce subsidies that encourage sugar farming on sensitive lands and redirect funds to pay for Everglades restoration was offered by Dan Miller (R-Fla.) and George Miller (D-Calif.). The amendment was defeated by a vote of 177 - 239. YES was the pro-environment vote. FIVE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO; ONE MEMBER (Northup) VOTED YES.
13 - On October 5, 2001, the House voted on the "Farm Security Act", H.R. 2646, sponsored by Agriculture Commitee Chairman Larry Combest (R-Texas) and Ranking Member Charlie Stenholm (D-Texas). According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), 84% ($60.2 billion) of the agricultural subsidies between 1996 and 2000 went to fewer than 25 percent of the nation's two million farmers. Under the current commodity payment system, operators who produce the most get the largest share of the federal payments. The result has been an increase in large corporate operations at the expense of family farmers and the environment. Even Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman recognized some of the problems associated with the current system and admitted the need for a stronger emphasis on conservation. Unfortunately, the farm bill sponsored by Reps. Combest and Stenholm will only exacerbate current trends that favor large corporate farms. In addition, the conservation title of H.R. 2646 is riddled with proposals to roll back long-standing conservation programs that have helped private landowners improve water quality, reduce soil erosion, restore wetlands, enhance wildlife habitat and preserve working agricultural lands. The U.S. House of Representatives voted to approve H.R. 2646 by a vote of 291 - 120. NO was the pro-environment vote. FIVE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED YES; ONE MEMBER (Northup) VOTED NO.
14 - On December
6, 2001, the House, by a vote of 267 - 162, rejected a Democratic bid to
include issues such as child labor, environmental protection, and food
safety in the core text of trade pacts negotiated by the administration.
The Republican bill (H.R. 3005) characterizes labor and environmental disputes
only as a U.S. 'negotiating objective.' YES was the
pro-environment vote.
ALL SIX MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup,
Lucas, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO.
15 - On December 6, 2001, the House voted on H.R. 3005, a bill introduced by Rep. Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) that would give the president the authority to negotiate trade agreements. Under "fast track", Congress can only vote yes or no on the finished agreement. Even if Congress establishes environmental or labor negotiation objectives, fast track denies it the leverage to ensure that this or future administrations will deliver on them. Fast track would, among other things, pave the way for an expansion of the controversial "investor" rules in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Under these provisions, the Canadian corporation Methanix sued the United States for $1 billion, claiming California's ban on MTBE has cost it money. MTBE is a toxic gasoline additive that has contaminated drinking-water wells and groundwater throughout California. An expansion of these investor rules would vastly increase similar lawsuits against our environmental laws, potentially costing taxpayers billions of dollars. Already, such rules are being used to discourage countries from adopting badly needed protections for the environment. Environmental, consumer, social justice, and labor groups oppose H. R. 3005 because it fails to ensure adequate environmental and labor standards and could undermine current protections. The bill, which is supported by the Bush administration, is similar to fast track legislation that was rejected by Congress in 1997 and 1998, except that it provides even fewer positive labor and environmental provisions, while offering more restrictions on public safety and environmental protection. The U.S. House of Representatives voted to approve H.R. 3005 by a vote of 215 - 214. No was the pro-environment vote. FIVE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Lucas, Northup & Fletcher) VOTED YES; ONE MEMBER (Rogers) VOTED NO.
16 - On February
13, 2002, the House rejected, by a vote of 219-209, an amendment (H. AMDT.
420) to the Campaign Finance Reform bill (H.R. 2356) that was backed by
the National Rifle Association. It would have exempted communications about
gun rights from the bill's restrictions on issue advertising. A NO vote
was the pro-environment vote. ONE MEMBER OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUKY VOTED
NO (Northup); FOUR MEMBERS VOTED YES (Whitfield, Lewis, Lucas, and Rogers);
AND ONE MEMBER DID NOT VOTE (Fletcher).
17 - On February 13, 2002, the House rejected, by a vote of 185 - 244, an amendment (H. AMDT. 426) to the Campaign Finance Reform bill (H.R. 2356) that would have completely banned soft money, thereby not allowing its use by state parties for generic voter registration activities. Although perhaps sounding good in principle, those supporting this amendment were well aware that the Senate would never support such an amendment and, therefore, if added to the bill, the Campaign Finance Reform bill would have effectively killed any chance for reform. So, a NO vote was a vote in support of reform and a pro-environment vote. FIVE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED YES; ONE (Lucas) VOTED NO.
18 - On February 14, 2002, the House approved long-stalled legislation aimed at squeezing special interest money out of politics, marking a critical step toward enactment of the most far-reaching overhaul of campaign finance laws in a quarter-century. The bill, which would curb unlimited "soft money" contributions and restrict electioneering ads by outside groups, now goes to the Senate, which passed a somewhat different version of the legislation last year. In what could be the final struggle over the measure, the Senate will have to decide whether to approve the House version as is or send the issue to a House-Senate conference, where foes could mount another effort to scuttle it. The House vote was 240 to 189, with 41 Republicans joining all but 12 Democrats in supporting the bill. A YES vote was the pro-environment vote. FIVE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE FROM KENTUCKY (Whitfield, Lewis, Northup, Rogers, & Fletcher) VOTED NO; ONE (Lucas) VOTED YES.
19 - On Wednesday, May 8, 2002, the House voted 306-117 to overrule Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn’s (R) veto and proceed with the Bush Administration’s proposal to store nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The measure flew through two House committees, first by a vote of 24-2 in the Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee and then by a vote of 41-6 in the full Energy and Commerce Committee. On April 8, 2002, Gov. Guinn vetoed the President’s recommendation to open the facility, citing scientific uncertainties with the underground storage area as well as safety concerns with transporting nuclear waste through 350 congressional districts (including several in Kentucky). His veto triggered a 90 legislative-day deadline for Congress to act. If either chamber fails to do so, the veto would be upheld. NO was the pro-environment vote. All of Kentucky's representatives (Lewis, Whitfield, Lucas, Rogers, Northup, and Fletcher) voted YES.
20 - On Friday, May 10, 2002, the House passed the $383.4 billion National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 4546) for fiscal year 2003 by a vote of 359-58. The measure is $4 billion more than the administration had requested and does not include $10 billion for programs specific to the war on terrorism. Some in the Defense Department have used the bipartisan support for increased defense spending as an opportunity to exempt certain military activities from the nation’s most important environmental laws, including the Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Wilderness Act. While there may be support for more defense, there is also overwhelming opposition from the American public for exempting the Defense Department from environmental statutes. In fact, a recent Zogby poll of 1,002 registered voters found that 85 percent believe the Defense Department should follow the same environmental and public health laws as other agencies and individuals. Existing laws already afford the Defense Department flexibility to balance environmental protection and military readiness by allowing exemptions on a case-by-case basis in the interest of national security. An effort led by Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.), Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.) and Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) to strip the environmental exemption provisions failed when House leaders implemented a debate rule blocking additional amendments. The House voted 215-202 against a motion that would have overturned the rule. NO was the pro-environment vote. Five of Kentucky's representatives (Lewis, Whitfield, Rogers, Northup, and Fletcher) voted YES; one (Lucas) voted NO.
21 - On July
17, 2002, the House voted in support (252 - 172) of an amendment (H. AMDT.
540) offered by Rep. Capps
(D-CA) that prevents
federal funds from being used to develop 36 California offshore drilling
leases. The pro-environment vote was YES. All of Kentucky's representatives
(Lewis, Whitfield, Rogers, Lucas, Northup, and Fletcher) voted NO.
22 - On July
27, 2002, the
House voted 215 - 212 in support of a major trade bill that allows
the president to negotiate
international trade
agreements that Congress may approve or reject but cannot change. Unfortunately,
this bill does not include adequate assurances that labor rights and the
environment will be protected in future trade deals. To ensure improved
living standards at home and abroad, trade policy needs to enhance human
rights, reaffirm worker rights and promote environmental protection. This
bill fails on all these counts. NO was the pro-environment vote. All of
Kentucky's representatives (Lewis, Whitfield, Lucas, Rogers, Northup, and
Fletcher) voted YES.
