Defense ESA Exemptions

Senate Roll Call Vote 190

2003 Scorecard Vote

Pro-environment vote

Yes

Votes For

51

Votes Against

48

Not Voting

1

The 25 million acres of land owned and operated by the Defense Department provide important habitat for hundreds of endangered and threatened species. However, military officials contend that protecting these species and complying with environmental laws hampers military readiness activities.

According to a May 2003 national poll, taken after the Iraq war had begun, more than four out of five likely voters believe government agencies, including the Defense Department, should have to follow the same environmental and public health laws as everyone else. Nevertheless, the department proposed that Congress grant it sweeping exemptions from some of the nation’s most important environmental and public health laws, including the Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Clean Air Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and Superfund.

During consideration of S. 1050, the defense authorization bill, the Senate Armed Services Committee rejected many of these requests but inserted a provision exempting the military from habitat protection provisions of the Endangered Species Act when the lands in question are covered by an integrated natural resources management plan. Because such plans are often underfunded and ineffective, this exemption would remove a vital safety net for more than 300 threatened and endangered species living on Defense Department lands. Environmentalists also pointed out that the proposed exemption was unnecessary since, under the Endangered Species Act, the Secretary of Defense already has the authority to waive regulations on a case-by-case basis in the interest of national security.

In response to the proposed exemption, Senators Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Daniel Akaka (D-HI), Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) and Jim Jeffords (I-VT) introduced an amendment to the defense authorization bill that would have required the Interior Secretary to assure that the lands in questions were adequately protected before the Endangered Species Act could be waived. On May 21, 2003, the Senate approved the amendment by a 58-41 vote (Senate roll call vote 190). YES is the pro-environment vote. The Senate then approved the authorization bill. However, when the bill went to House-Senate conference, Republican leaders, including Senator John Warner (R-VA) and Representative Duncan Hunter (R-CA), succeeded in removing the Senate’s bipartisan language and adding broad military exemptions from both the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The final bill was approved by Congress and signed into law by President Bush.

Votes

Show
Show
Export data (CSV)
  • Pro-environment vote
  • Anti-environment Vote
  • Missed Vote
  • Excused
  • Not Applicable

Vote Key

Sort by
Alabama
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Alaska
2025 State Scorecard Average

11%

Arizona
2025 State Scorecard Average

89%

Arkansas
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

California
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

Colorado
2025 State Scorecard Average

93%

Connecticut
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

Delaware
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Florida
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Georgia
2025 State Scorecard Average

93%

Hawaii
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Idaho
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Illinois
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Indiana
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Iowa
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Kansas
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Kentucky
2025 State Scorecard Average

6%

Louisiana
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Maine
2025 State Scorecard Average

63%

Maryland
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Massachusetts
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Michigan
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

Minnesota
2025 State Scorecard Average

94%

Mississippi
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Missouri
2025 State Scorecard Average

4%

Montana
2025 State Scorecard Average

6%

Nebraska
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Nevada
2025 State Scorecard Average

94%

New Hampshire
2025 State Scorecard Average

93%

New Jersey
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

New Mexico
2025 State Scorecard Average

94%

New York
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

North Carolina
2025 State Scorecard Average

6%

North Dakota
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Ohio
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Oklahoma
2025 State Scorecard Average

1%

Oregon
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Pennsylvania
2025 State Scorecard Average

40%

Rhode Island
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

South Carolina
2025 State Scorecard Average

1%

South Dakota
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Tennessee
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Texas
2025 State Scorecard Average

1%

Utah
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Vermont
2025 State Scorecard Average

96%

Virginia
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

Washington
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

West Virginia
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Wisconsin
2025 State Scorecard Average

49%

Wyoming
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%