Roy Blunt (R-MO-07)
Candidate for U.S. Senate Seat
Lifetime Score: 2%
| Year | Pro-Env. Votes | Total Votes | Yearly Score | Yearly Lifetime |
| 1997 | 2 | 16 | 13 | 13% |
| 1998 | 1 | 13 | 8 | 10% |
| 1999 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 7% |
| 2000 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 5% |
| 2001 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 4% |
| 2002 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 4% |
| 2003 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 3% |
| 2004 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 3% |
| 2005 | 1 | 18 | 6 | 3% |
| 2006 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 3% |
| 2007 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 2% |
| 2008 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 2% |
In his twelve years in office, Rep. Roy Blunt only cast four pro-environment votes—two in 1997, his first year in office, once in 1998, and one more time in 2005. Out of 175 votes that LCV scored from 1997- 2008, his 4 pro-environment votes give him a lifetime score of 2%. Not surprisingly, in 2009, he has maintained a staunchly anti-environment record; most notably, he voted no on the American Clean Energy Security Act in June. Rep. Blunt has made his position clear: he does not support a clean energy future for Missourian families. We know exactly what kind of Senator Roy Blunt would be and that’s exactly why LCV is naming Roy Blunt as the inaugural member of the Dirty Dozen for the 2010 campaign cycle.
In his career, Roy Blunt has accepted $428,098 from the Oil and Gas industry, $395,584 from Electric Utilities, $380,475 from the automotive industry, and $247,900 from air transport in his political career.1 Blunt has taken $78,134 from the coal mining industry over his entire career.2 So far this campaign season, he has already collected $18,900, making him the #4 recipient of money from Dirty Coal in Congress for the 2010 election cycle.3
Roy Blunt has consistently tried to stand in the way of increasing standards for vehicle emissions. He voted against improving CAFÉ standards three times. In 2007, he voted against raising the automobile mileage standards to 35 miles per gallon after voting against raising the standard in 2005, 2003, and 2001. Roy Blunt has consistently turned his back on opportunities to improve fuel economy standards.
Roy Blunt has been an unwavering supporter of Big Oil through his votes to maintain tax breaks and subsidies to Big Oil. Since 2003, he has voted on the side of the polluters six times. In 2008, he voted to provide federal subsidies for the development of polluting fossil fuels such as oil shale. In 2007, he voted against an oil subsidies repeal in addition to voting against the amended version of HR 6, which would have improved fuel efficiency standards in vehicles, created a Renewable Electricity Standard, and shifted subsidies from the oil and gas industry to renewable. The other votes were in 2003, 2004, and 2005.
Roy Blunt refuses to support renewable tax credits and adamantly opposes any kind of Renewable Electricity Standard, even though in 2008, voters in Missouri overwhelmingly backed an RES on the ballot in November. In 2007 and 2008 alone, he voted four times against clean energy tax credits and setting requirements for renewable electricity, illustrating that he is out of touch with Missourians in his choices to block progress and support Big Oil.
Blunt has continuously supported fossil fuel research programs, after one promising vote to cut funding in his first few months in office. In 2007, Blunt supported a motion to replace “biofuel” with “alternative fuels” in a bill as well as redefine alternative fuel to include coal-derived liquids, to accelerate production of liquid coal. In 2001, he voted against an amendment to cut $52 million from funding for fossil fuel development to go towards a $24 million increase for low income weatherization assistance and $12 million increase for other energy conservation programs. In 1999, Blunt voted against transferring funds from the fossil fuel research to the Land and Water Conservation fund. In 1998, Blunt voted against an amendment to cut $44.5 million from other programs, mostly related to fossil energy, to fund increases in energy efficiency programs. However, in 1997, Blunt voted for an amendment to cut $292 million from a “Clean Coal” research program in addition to the $100 million already cut by the House Interior Appropriations subcommittee.
To that end, Roy Blunt cast four pro-environment votes: two during his first year in office in 1997, one in 1998, and one in 2005. One such vote was to formally establish conservation as the mission of National Wildlife Refuges and it passed with 407 yes votes, and one no vote. Clearly it was a landmark vote, but hardly controversial. His other pro-environment votes for Tropical Forest Conservation, against funding clean coal, and against lifting a moratorium on drilling for natural gas, are inconsistent with the other 171 opportunities he has had to protect our environment.
Roy Blunt: Comprehensive Vote History
Energy and Global Warming
2008
- Environmental Funding: Blunt voted NO on a budget agreement providing $38.6 billion in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 discretionary spending for environment and natural resources programs. This funding level is $1.9 billion above the FY 2008 enacted level, and $3.9 billion over the President’s FY 2009 request. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 382, 06/05/2008).
2007
- Global Warming and National Security: Blunt voted YES on Rep. Peter Hoekstra’s amendment to H.R. 2082, the Intelligence authorization bill. This amendment would have struck an important provision, which called for a National Intelligence Estimate on the security implications of climate change. The estimate would examine the political, social, economic and agricultural consequences of global warming over the next three decades. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 337, 05/11/2007).
- Reducing Global Warming: Blunt voted YES on Rep. Joe Barton’s motion to strike a resolution in H.R. 2643 that endorsed mandatory limits on global warming pollution. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 555, 06/26/2007).
- Environmental Funding: Blunt voted NO to H.R. 2643, the Interior-Environment appropriations bill, which allocated vital funding for programs that safeguard our communities and protect our public lands, wildlife, air and water. H.R. 2643 provided an increase of nearly $2 billion over the president’s budget request—a sizeable down payment that would begin to restore environment and conservation agencies and programs. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 2643, 6/27/07)
- Clean Air: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2643 introduced by Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnston. This amendment denied funds for the implementation of a rule change proposed by the EPA, which would have allowed polluters to sidestep emissions reduction requirements if they release less than 10 tons per year of a single pollutant or less than 25 tons per year of combined pollutants. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 556, 6/26/2007).
2005
- Environmental Funding Cuts: Blunt voted YES to the 2006 House Budget Resolution, which made substantial cuts to environmental programs, including a cut to discretionary spending on the environment and natural resources by $2.85 billion, more than 9 percent below the previous year’s levels. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 88, 03/17/2005).
- Energy Bill: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 6, the House Energy Bill, that included environmentally harmful provisions suck as opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, Giving cities more time to reduce smog pollution without requiring them to put stronger pollution controls in place, and providing billions in tax breaks to oil companies at a time of record profits. In addition, only 5 percent of the bill’s $8 billion in tax breaks would have promoted efficiency and clean energy; the rest was doled out to such polluting energy sources as oil, gas, and coal. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 132, 04/21/2005)
- Energy Conference Report: Blunt voted YES to a new version of H.R. 6, the House Energy Bill, which weakened key environmental protections for oil and gas drilling, added billions in new subsidies for coal, oil and nuclear power, and stripped states and local governments of their authority over liquefied natural gas terminal siting. NO was the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 445, 07/28/2005).
- Air Pollution and Oil Refineries: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 3893, the Gasoline for America’s Security Act of 2005, which unnecessarily extended Clean Air Act deadlines for ozone pollution cleanup; limited the use of cleaner fuels; allowed the President to unilaterally designate federal land, including national wildlife refuges, on which to site new refineries; gave the Department of Energy greater authority over refinery authorizations than state governments and the EPA; and required taxpayers to reimburse refiners for any delays in permitting, construction, or operation caused by litigation or legal compliance. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 519, 10/07/2005).
2004
- Environmental Funding: Blunt voted YES to H.Con. Res. 393, which cut discretionary environmental spending by $1.5 billion. NO was the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 92, 03/25/2004).
- National Energy Policy: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 6, a bill laden with more than $37 billion in corporate tax breaks and subsidies for the coal, oil, nuclear and natural gas industries. The House-Senate conference committee added a provision to give polluted urban areas more time to meet Clean Air Act targets without having to implement stronger air pollution controls, as well as a $6 billion production tax credit to help jump-start the nuclear industry. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 241, 06/15/2004).
- NEPA Limits: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 4513, which would streamline licensing and siting for alternative energy projects on federal lands by abrogating NEPA provisions that require federal agencies to identify and evaluate alternatives to the projects under review. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 242, 06/15/2004).
2003
- Energy Plan: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 6, a bill laden with more than $37 billion in corporate tax breaks and subsidies for the coal, oil, nuclear and natural gas industries. It gave the Interior Secretary authority to exempt oil companies from paying for drilling rights on public lands and it included a provision to allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The House bill also largely failed to advance clean, efficient energy technologies that would enhance our national energy security and failed to increase automobile fuel efficiency standards. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 145, 04/11/2003).
- Ozone Pollution: Blunt voted NO on a motion to instruct conference committee members to drop the Barton language from the energy conference report, which would have given polluted areas more time to clean up without having to implement stronger air pollution controls. YES is the pro-environment vote.
2001
- Hardrock Mining: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2217 that blocked the Interior Department from rolling back newly issued regulations on mining practices. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 182, 06/21/2001)
- Energy Efficiency: Blunt voted NO on an amendment, which increased low income weatherization assistance by $24 million and added $12 million for other energy conservation programs, paid for by a $52 million cut in funding for fossil fuel development. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 178, 06/21/2001).
2000
- Global Climate Change: Blunt voted NO on an amendment clarifying that Rep. Joe Knollenberg’s language prohibiting agencies like EPA from taking any steps to reduce global warming gases did not apply to programs that are otherwise authorized by law. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call 323, 06/26/2000).
1999
- Fossil Fuel Research: Blunt voted NO on two amendment to FY 2000 Interior Appropriations bill that cut portions of the $280 million earmarked for the Energy Department’s fossil fuel program and reallocated to local governments and the Land and Water Conservation Funds. YES is the pro-environment vote. (7/13/1999).
1998
- Funding Energy Efficiency Programs: Blunt voted NO on an amendment that would have cut $44.5 million from other programs, mostly related to fossil fuel development, to fund increases in energy efficiency programs. YES is the pro-environment vote. (07/21/1998).
- Global Warming Gag Rule: Blunt voted NO on an amendment that overrode an anti-environmental rider that sought to prohibit the EPA and the Council on Environmental Quality from conducting educational programs or seminars on global warming. YES is the pro-environment vote. (07/23/1998).
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards
2007
- CAFÉ & Clean Energy: Blunt voted NO on an amended version of H.R. 6, which raised automobile mileage standards to 35 miles per gallon—the first such increase in more than 30 years—and maintained a renewable electricity standard of 15 percent. H.R. 6 also provided new incentives and standards for energy efficiency and transferred billions of dollars in tax subsidies for the oil industry toward clean energy and energy efficiency. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 1140, 12/06/07).
2005
- Fuel Economy: Blunt voted NO to an amendment to raise the CAFE standard for cars and light trucks to 33 miles per gallon by 2016. If enacted, House Amendment 73 would have saved 1 million barrels of oil a day by 2016 and would have prevented the annual release of 150 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 121, 04/20/2005).
2003
- Oil Savings: Blunt voted NO to an amendment instructing the Department of Transportation to reduce the amount of oil consumed by U.S. automobiles by five percent by 2010. The amendment left it up to the administration to determine how to achieve the reduction. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 132, 04/10/2003).
2001
- Fuel Economy: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 4, which would have increased fuel economy standards by closing the light-truck loophole. The amendment would have combined light trucks and cars into one fleet that would have been required to meet a 27.5 miles-per-gallon average by 2007. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 311, 08/01/2001).
Renewable Energy
2008
- Clean Energy Tax Credits: Blunt voted NO on H.R. 5351, which extended the tax credit for wind and other renewables by three years and reinstated expired credits for commercial and resident buildings. In addition, H.R. 5351 made new tax credits available for plug-in hybrids and other transportation alternatives. YES is the Pro Environment Vote. (Roll Call No.84, 2/27/2008)
- Undermining Clean Energy Tax Credits: Blunt voted NO on H.R. 6049, which extended the tax credits for wind and other renewable energies by one year, while renewing several important research and development tax credits, and renewing the commercial and residential energy efficiency tax credits. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 344, 5/21/2008)
2007
- Renewable Electricity Standard: Blunt voted NO on H.R. 3221, which set new efficiency standards for appliances, lightings and buildings. It also took important steps toward restoring sound stewardship of public lands, America’s fish and wildlife, coasts, and oceans. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 832, 08/04/2007).
- Liquid Coal: Blunt voted YES to Rep. John Shimkus’ motion to replace the term “biofuel” with “alternative fuel” and to redefine alternative fuels to include coal-derived liquids during House consideration of H.R. 547. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 91,02/18/2007).
2005
- Natural Gas Facilities: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 6, the energy bill, which would have struck a provision that preempted all state authority and left the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) the main arbiter of siting decisions. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 131, 04/21/2005).
2004
- Fuel Blends: Blunt voted YES to a motion that would allow the passage of H.R. 4545, the Gasoline Reduction Act, which gives the EPA the authority to let states suspend the use of these cleaner-burning fuels without stemming the resulting increases in air pollution. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 247, 06/16/2004).
2001
- National Energy Policy: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 4, the House energy bill that would open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other public lands to oil drilling and other energy development and would give polluting energy companies more than $38 billion in new or expanded taxpayer-funded handouts. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 320, 08/02/2001).
Oil Drilling
2008
- Gutting Renewable Energy: Blunt voted YES to Representative John Peterson’s motion to strike the renewable electricity standard in H.R. 6899 and open up additional federal lands and waters to drilling. The motion would also have provided federal subsidies for the development of polluting fossil fuels such as oil shale. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 598, 09/16/08).
2007
- Oil Subsidies repeal. Blunt voted NO on H.R. 6, the CLEAN Energy Act of 2007, which demonstrated a new commitment to shifting royalties and tax incentives away from oil and gas companies and toward renewable energy and energy efficiency. YES is the Pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 40, 01/18/2007).
- Oil Shale: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2653, which would delay by one year the implementation of a full-scale commercial leasing program for oil shale on Western public lands – required by a 2005 law. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 577, 06/27/07)
- Offshore Drilling: Blunt voted YES to Rep. John Peterson’s amendment to H.R. 2643, which would have lifted the moratorium for offshore natural gas leasing and development. The Peterson amendment would have allowed the Interior Department to issue new leases within 25 miles of U.S. coastline. Blunt NO is the pro-environment vote. ( Roll Call No. 552, 6/26/2007).
2006
- Preventing Offshore Drilling: Blunt voted YES on H.R. 5386, which included language that would have repealed the longstanding congressional moratorium on offshore oil and gas drilling and permitted drilling as close as three miles away from some of America’s coastlines. NO is a pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 170, 05/18/2006).
- Increasing Offshore Drilling: Blunt voted YES on the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act, which would have permitted oil and gas drilling within 100 miles and given states the option to allow drilling as close as three to seven miles off their coasts. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 356, 06/29/2006).
- Drilling Royalties: Blunt failed to vote for an amendment to prevent oil companies that benefit from unlimited royalty relief and to encourage companies to voluntarily renegotiate erroneous leases and accept limits of royalty relief. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 167, 06/29/2006).
- Oil Refineries: Blunt voted YES on H.R. 5254, which contained provisions that would have undermined the public health and environment permitting decisions by state and federal officials. It would have given oil companies the right to sue public health officials in order to speed up refinery projects. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 232, 06/07/2006).
2005
- Oil Refineries: Blunt voted NO to Rep. Hilda Solis’ amendment to H.R. 6, the House energy bill, which would have stripped the bill of environmentally harmful sanctions. The bill contained provisions that weakened the ability of state and local communities, as well as EPA and other federal agencies, to regulate the sitting of new oil refineries or the expansion of existing facilities. The bill transfers many of these authorities to the Department of Energy, which has no mandate to protect public health or the environment. YES is the pro-environmental vote. (Roll Call No. 115, 04/20/2005).
- Natural Gas Drilling: Blunt voted NO to Rep. John Peterson’s amendment to H.R. 2361 that would have lifted the moratorium on offshore drilling for natural gas. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 192, 05/19/2005)
2004
- Oil Refineries: Blunt voted YES on H.R. 4517, the Refinery Revitalization Act, which would have made it easier for oil companies to skirt public health laws when building new refineries or expanding old ones. It would have taken authority for environmental permitting in so-called "refinery revitalization zones" away from the EPA and given it to the Energy Department, which has neither expertise nor interest in controlling harmful refinery pollution. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 246, 06/16/2004).
Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
2008
- Arctic Refuge, Offshore, Western Drilling: Blunt voted YES to Rep. Paul Ryan’s motion during consideration of FY 2009 budget resolution to instruct conferees designed to authorize drilling in protected, environmentally sensitive areas all across the country. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 321, 05/14/2008)
2006
- Arctic Refuge Drilling. Blunt voted YES to H.R. 5429, a standalone Arctic drilling bill. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 209, 05/25/2006).
2005
- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge I: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 6 that would have struck the Arctic drilling provision from the House energy bill. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 122, 04/20/2005).
- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge II: Blunt voted YES to a budget resolution conference report that contained instructions to open the Arctic refuge to oil and gas leasing and development. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 149, 04/28/2005).
- Arctic National Wildlife Refuge III: Blunt voted YES to a provision to open the refuge that was added to the Defense Appropriations conference report, which included funds for both U.S. troops and hurricane relief. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 666, 12/19/2005).
2003
- Arctic Drilling: Blunt voted YES to an amendment to H.R. 6 that purported to limit development of the Arctic refuge to 2,000 acres, but instead would have allowed the 2,000 acres to be scattered across the coastal plain and would have excluded gravel mines, permanent roads, and even pipelines from the total tally. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 134, 04/10/2003).
2001
- Arctic Drilling: Blunt voted YES to an amendment that purported to limit the environmental damage from oil development on the coastal plain. Their 2,000-acre "limitation" was designed to mislead both the public and other lawmakers. Not only would it allow the 2,000 acres to be scattered across the coastal plain, it would exempt gravel mines, permanent roads, and even pipelines from the "limitation." NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 317, 08/01/2001).
Environmental Funding
2000
- Land Conservation Funding: Blunt voted NO on H.R. 701, which would permanently fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund, providing money for federal, state and local agencies to buy land for open space and outdoor recreation using revenues from offshore drilling leases, with reduced incentives for new drilling. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 179, 05/11/2000).
1999
- Land and Water Conservation Fund: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2000 Interior Appropriations bill that replenished the Land and Water Conservation Fund with $30 million in state grants. YES is the pro-environment vote. (06/13/1999)
Public Lands and Logging
2008
- Public Lands Protection: Blunt voted NO to a measure in the Omnibus bill that designated the 106,000 acre Wild Sky Wilderness in Washington State to the National Wilderness Preservation System, added the Eightmile River in Connecticut to the Wild and Scenic River System, and authorized new protections for historic sites, national parks and precious water resources. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No 226, 04/29/08)
- Grazing and National Landscape Conservation System: Blunt voted YES Rep. Steve Pearce’s amendment to H.R. 2016, which sought to enshrine current grazing operations on units within the National Landscape Conservation System regardless of the damage being caused to the land. NO is the pro-environment vote.(Roll Call No. 172, 04/09/09).
2007
- Tongass Logging Roads: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2643, which would have ended taxpayer subsidies for new commercial logging roads in the Tongass. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 563, 06/26/2007).
2006
- Salvage Logging/ Environmental Exemptions: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 4200 that sought to strike the bill’s waivers of the Clean Water Act and NEPA for logging projects in roadless areas. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call NO. 147, 05/17/2006).
- Salvage Logging: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 4200, which created incentives that shifted Forest Service efforts away from much-needed community protection and forest restoration and toward destructive logging. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 151, 05/17/1987).
- Tongass Logging Roads: Blunt failed to vote on an amendment to H.R. 53866, which ended taxpayer subsidies for new commercial logging roads in Tongass, a national forest in Alaska. YES is the pro-environmental vote. (Roll Call No. 168 05/18/2006).
2005
- Border Construction Exemption: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to strip the waiver provision from H.R. 418, which would give the Secretary of Homeland Security authority to waive any federal or state law in building roads, walls, fences and other barriers along U.S. borders. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 29, 02/10/2005).
- Public Lands Sell-Off: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 4241, the budget reconciliation bill that contained a controversial provision that would have fundamentally rewritten national mining policy by ending a decade-long congressional ban on the sale of public lands to mining companies. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 601, 11/18/2005).
2004
- Tongass Protections: Blunt voted NO to an amendment to H.R. 4568, the Interior appropriations bill, to prohibit the use of federal funds for building commercial logging roads in the Tongass. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 253, 06/16/2004).
- National Forest Management: Blunt failed to vote for House Amendment 556 to prevent the Administration from finalizing or implementing new regulations that would eliminate virtually all the environmental standards to which the Forest Service could be held accountable. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 254, 06/16/2004).
- Yellowstone Snowmobiles: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to uphold the original ban on snowmobile use in Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and promote access to the park via multi-passenger snowcoaches. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 385, 07/17/2003).
2003
- Forest Fire Policy: Blunt voted YES to The Miller-DeFazio-Rahall-Conyers substitute to H.R. 1904, which would have allocated 85 percent of the authorized funds for projects within a half mile of at-risk communities. While the amendment would have permitted NEPA exemptions within these half-mile community zones, it would have reinstated NEPA restrictions for any projects outside these zones. Moreover, the substitute amendment would have prohibited forest thinning projects in roadless areas of national forests. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 198, 05/20/2003).
- Forest Roadless Rule: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2691, the 2004 Interior appropriations bill, to prohibit the administration from expending any federal funds to make changes to the roadless rule as it was originally published (the Clinton administration issued an administrative rule, known as the roadless area conservation rule, to protect some 58.5 million acres of roadless national forest lands from roadbuilding and most forms of logging). YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 386, 07/17/2003).
- Snowmobiles in Yellowstone: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to uphold the original ban on snowmobile use in Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and promote access to the park via multi-passenger snowcoaches. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 385, 07/17/2003).
- Bison in Yellowstone: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to prohibit the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service from using federal funds to kill bison in and around Yellowstone. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 383, 07/17/2003).
- Forest Management Plans: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to prevent the administration from finalizing or implementing new regulations that would eliminate the population viability rule, weakening safeguards for wildlife and wildlife habitats. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 384, 07/17/2003).
- Delaware Channel Project: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2754 to reduce funding for the Delaware River deepening project by $7.7 million. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 391, 07/18/2003).
- Bike and Pedestrian Trails: Blunt voted NO on an amendment that reinstated the 10 percent allocation for transportation enhancements for walking, bicycling and trail creation. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 469, 09/04/2003).
2002
- Yucca Mountain: Blunt voted YES to a motion that designated Yucca Mountain in Nevada as a repository site for Nuclear Waste, thus overriding the Governor of Nevada’s veto. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 133, 05/08/2002).
- Defense Environmental Exemptions: Blunt voted YES to a measure in the defense authorization bill that would exempt the Defense Department from the Endangered Species Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act on military lands. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 136, 05/09/2002).
2000
- Utah Wilderness: Blunt voted YES to an amendment to H.R. 3605, which would have allowed the Bureau of Land Management to decide where off-road vehicle use should be allowed in Utah’s San Rafael Swell Region. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 240, 06/07/2000).
- National Monuments: Blunt voted YES to an amendment to H.R. 4578, which would have kept language in the bill that would have prevented the use of funds for the design, planning or management of national monuments created since 1999. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 280, 06/15/2000).
- Columbia Basin Land Management: Blunt voted YES to an amendment that would have delayed completion of the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Plan by requiring Forest Service to ensure that the plan did not adversely affect small business in the area. Environmentalists believed that this language would set a dangerous precedent by requiring burdensome new analysis for any management plans. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 279, 6/15/2000).
1999
- Mining Waste: Blunt voted NO to an amendment to affirm the Department of Interior’s interpretation of the Mining Law of 1872’s millsite provision, which limits each 20-acre mining claim to only 5 acres for processing mineral ore and dumping mineral waste. This amendment was intended to preempt a rider introduce by Sen. Larry Craig that would have legalized unlimited mine waste dumping on public lands. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Spring 1999).
1998
- Logging in National Forests: Blunt voted YES on H.R. 2515, which would have required the Forest Service to designate “recovery areas” within national forests and to conduct “recovery projects” in these areas. The bill contains many incentives to ensure that most of these projects would be commercial timber sales and entire national forests could be designated for logging. NO is the pro-environment vote. (03/27/1998).
- Protecting Roadless Areas in Forests: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2515 to exempt roadless areas covered by the Administration’s policy from the effects of H.R. 2515 (see above explanation of H.R. 2515). YES is the pro-environment vote. (03/27/1998).
- Alaska Logging Roads: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 4193, which would have prohibited funds from being used to construct new roads in the Tongass National Forest. YES is the pro-environment vote. (07/23/1998)
- Alaska Wildlife Area Road: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 4193 that would would have struck the Copper River easement provision. The provision sought to grant an easement through the Chugach National Forest so that an Alaska native corporation could build a road to access their land holdings, which contain timber, coal, oil and gas. YES is the pro-environment vote. (08/18/1998).
1997
- Logging Roads Subsidies: Blunt voted YES to an amendment to H.R. 2107 that reduced Forest Services logging road construction budget only $5.6 million, rather than the proposed $45 million cut, and the Purchaser Road Credits program by on $25 million rather than the proposed $50 million cut. NO is the pro-environment vote. (07/10/1997).
- Limiting National Monuments: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 112, which prohibited the President from unilaterally and rapidly designating a national monument larger than 50,000 acres, an arbitrary acreage limit is smaller than most prior monuments. NO is the pro-environment vote. (10/07/1997).
Clean Water
2007
- Clean Water: Blunt voted NO on the Water Quality Financing Act, which authorized $14 billion for a new revolving fund to support states’ water infrastructure projects. It also provided an additional $2 billion for three existing clean-water programs at the EPA. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 135, 03/09/2007).
2006
- Clean Water: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 5386 that would enforce the EPA to reaffirm a broad application of the Clean Water Act. YES is a pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 165, 05/18/2006).
2005
- MTBE Liability: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 6 that would have removed a provision shielding MTBE manufacturers from liability for leakage of MTBE into groundwater from underground storage tanks. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 129, 04/21/2005).
- Water Projects: Blunt voted NO on an amendment that required the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to show that river traffic was increasing before a project that would require $1.8 billion for an expansion of locks and dams on the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers could be authorized. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 377, 07/14/2005).
2003
- Clean Water Act Exemptions: Blunt voted NO on a motion instructing House conferees to reject Clean Water Act exemptions for the oil and gas industry. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 618, 11/07/2003).
2001
- Arsenic: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2620 prohibiting the EPA from delaying or weakening the January 2001 standard of 10ppb of arsenic in drinking water. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 288, 07/27/2001).
2000
- Clean Water: Blunt voted NO on the Hinchey-Waxman amendment to H.R. 4635, which would have removed to anti-environment riders from the bill – one rider sought to impede EPA from substantially reducing permissible levels of arsenic in tap water and enforcing current levels, the other rider sought to halt EPA’s clean up of contaminated sediments in U.S. waterways pending an NAS study. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 204, 06/21/2000).
Clean Air
2007
- Clean Air: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2643 introduced by Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnston. This amendment denied funds for the implementation of a rule change proposed by the EPA, which would have allowed polluters to sidestep emissions reduction requirements if they release less than 10 tons per year of a single pollutant or less than 25 tons per year of combined pollutants. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 556, 6/26/2007).
2000
- Air Right to Know: Blunt voted YES to an amendment to H.R. 4635 prohibiting EPA from identifying areas that fail to meet a new ozone standard of 0.12 parts per million over a one-hour period. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 205, 06/21/2000).
1997
- Dirty Air: Blunt co-sponsored H.R. 1984, the “Moratorium on Establishment of the Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter Standards,” which would substitute Congress’ political judgment for EPA’s scientific judgment by cancelling EPA’s new ozone standards and reinstating the old standards. LCV considers co-sponsorship of H.R. 1984 an anti-environmental action.
Other
2008
- Green Building Standards: Blunt voted YES to an amendment to H.R. 2534, which would have weakened the provisions requiring federally funded housing developments and community revitalizations for the low income and elderly to meet residential and commercial buildings criteria for efficiency. The amendment would have made them voluntary, deleted the definition of specific green criteria, and allowed the Administration to choose any private industry-backed standard for voluntary compliance regardless of any positive public health or environmental benefit. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 16, 01/17/08)
- Public Transportation Grants: Blunt voted NO on H.R. 6052, which helped meet the growing demand for affordable, convenient public transportation in cities across America by providing grants to local transit agencies to expand and improve service. This legislation prevented service cuts or fare increases and offer fringe transit benefits to federal employees nationwide. YES is the pro-environment vote (Roll Call No. 467, 6/26/08).
2007
- Hardrock Mining Reform: Blunt voted NO on the Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act, which required new and existing mining operations to pay royalties for minerals taken from public lands; placed certain areas off limits to new claim-staking; set new environmental performance and reclamation standards; and used royalty monies to clean up previously abandoned mines. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 1033, 11/01/2007).
- Grasslands Protection: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to H.R. 2419 to reform the crop insurance industry and channel the resulting savings into grassland conservation. The amendment would have safeguarded an additional 3 million acres of grasslands, roughly triple what has currently been protected. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 754, 07/27/2007).
2006
- Toxic Release Inventory: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to the Interior-Environment appropriations bill, which prevented the EPA from moving forward with weakening the Toxic Release Inventory by raising reporting thresholds tenfold. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 165, 05/18/2006).
2005
- Environmental Justice: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to codify an executive order signed by President Clinton in 1994. The order requires federal agencies to identify the impacts of their programs on minority and low-income populations and to develop policies for implementing their programs in a nondiscriminatory manner. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 130, 04/21/2005).
- CAFTA: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 3045, CAFTA’s implementing legislation. CAFTA is opposed by environmentalists because of its weak and mostly unenforceable environmental provisions. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 443, 07/28/2005).
- Endangered Species: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 3824, which would: eliminate all protections for “critical habitat” (habitat essential to the conservation of a species) in the law; exempt EPA’s regulation of pesticide from the Endangered Species Act; mandate open-ended payments to developers for complying with the act; allow political appointees, including the Secretary of Interior, to overrule the scientific decisions made by wildlife experts; and short-circuit Fish and Wildlife Service review of federal agency actions that affect endangered species. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 519, 10/07/2005).
2004
- Scientific Integrity: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to create a bipartisan, independent commission of scientists and governmental and public Administration officials that would study the politicization of science and recommend ways to protect scientific analysis from political manipulation and interference. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 187, 05/18/2004).
2003
- Anti-Environmental Riders: Blunt voted NO on a motion to recommit the omnibus appropriations bill with instructions for the conferees to remove the Tongass and stewardship contracting riders and restore the prohibition on Arctic leasing –all of which had been added over the course of debate. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 31, 02/13/2003).
- International Family Planning: Blunt voted YES to an amendment that would reduce by $25 million the authorized level of the contribution to UNFPA, and render void the Crowley provision. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 362, 07/15/2003).
2002
- Farm Conservation I: Blunt voted NO on a motion to instruct House conferees that the farm bill should contain a reasonable cap on crop subsides and the resulting savings should go to boost funding for agricultural conservation and research programs. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 100, 04/18/2002).
- Klamath Farming Leases: Blunt voted NO on an amendment that would have prohibited the Fish and Wildlife Service from issuing new commercial agriculture leases in the Klamath Basin for crops that have severe environmental impacts. The amendment would still have permitted leases that were more consistent with farming practices on other national wildlife refuges. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 316, 07/17/2002).
- Right to Know: Blunt failed to vote on an amendment that would strike an exemption that would bar the government from disclosing information on environmental hazards, health hazards, product defects and other dangers, including reports of accidental spills. The exemption could also shelter industries from the consequences of violating the nation’s environmental, consumer protection, and health and safety laws. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 363, 07/26/2002).
- Trade and Environment: Blunt failed to vote for the Trade Act of 2002, which allows the President to negotiate trade agreements with expedited procedures for approval or disapproval by Congress. The bill was opposed by conservationists for failing to address key environmental provisions in a meaningful manner and for failing to encourage real environmental progress and cooperation with trading partners. The bill also failed to ensure that provisions such as Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement, which grant foreign corporations broad powers to sue U.S. taxpayers for damages if U.S. environmental, health, or land protection laws interfere with the corporations’ business, are not included in future trade deals. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 370, 07/27/2002).
2001
- Family Planning: Blunt voted YES to a motion that struck down the Lee amendment, which prohibited President Bush from refusing to fund foreign NGO’s solely because they provide medical services, including counseling and referral, on family planning. NO is the pro-environment choice. (Roll Call No. 115, 05/16.2001).
- EPA Enforcement: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to restore EPA funding and maintain its enforcement personnel after President Bush proposed a funding cut of $25 million. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 289, 07/27/2001).
- Farm Conservation: Blunt voted NO on an amendment to the farm bill that would provide $5.4 billion a year for agricultural conservation programs over the next 10 years. YES is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 366, 10/04/2001).
- Fast Track: Blunt voted YES to H.R. 3005, a fast-track authority bill that did not provide sufficient assurances to Congress that the administration would negotiate trade agreements that meet objectives designed to safeguard the environment. Furthermore, the bill did not adequately protect environmental and public health laws from lawsuits by foreign investors or from "regulatory takings" claims by foreign companies. NO is the pro-environment vote. (Roll Call No. 481, 12/06/2001).
