Restricting New Health and Safety Precautions

House Roll Call Vote 15

1999 Scorecard Vote

Pro-environment vote

Yes

Votes For

210

Votes Against

216

Not Voting

8

In 1995, Congress passed the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, which requires the Congressional Budget Office to report to government and the private sector the costs of complying with directives contained in new legislative proposals. The law also allows members of Congress to raise a procedural hurdle–a point of order–on bills that cost state and local governments more than $50 million to comply. 

This point of order currently does not apply when costs are borne by the private sector. However, the Mandates Information Act (H.R. 350), sponsored by Representative Gary Condit (D-CA), would expand on the existing law by establishing a new point of order against legislation that imposes costs of more than $100 million on business. The bill would create a legislative procedure allowing members of Congress to prevent important new health and safety protections from coming to a vote. 

The Mandates Information Act focuses exclusively on costs, but environmentalists believe that certain costs are not easily quantified, such as the extermination of a species or the costs of reducing the risks of birth defects and premature deaths. Nor does the bill consider whether the affected companies benefited financially from creating the pollution in the first place. This new hurdle could impede important legislation such as proposals to expand the public’s right to know about toxins in their communities or efforts to address pollution in lakes or rivers. 

The federal mandates on the private sector that H.R. 350 targets include: 

  • requirements that companies generating hazardous waste pay the costs of disposal; 
  • requirements that companies discarding waste in lakes and streams reduce the toxic and cancer-causing chemicals they release; and 
  • requirements that meat packers ensure that the meat they sell is not contaminated with deadly bacteria. 

The point of order established by the Mandates Information Act would limit debate on new health and safety protections to 10 minutes per side, impeding full consideration of any given bill’s benefits. While the point of order could be waived by a simple-majority vote, such a vote would also allow members to block important protections without voting directly against them. 

In response to the bill, Representative Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) offered an amendment that would remove the separate vote on the point of order. It would also add 20 minutes to the amount of time provided for debate. On February 10, 1999, the House rejected the Boehlert amendment 210–216. YES is the pro-environment vote. 

On February 10, 1999, the House passed the Mandates Information Act by a vote of 274–149. NO is the pro-environment vote.

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

26%

Alaska
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Arizona
2025 State Scorecard Average

33%

Arkansas
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

California
2025 State Scorecard Average

78%

Colorado
2025 State Scorecard Average

51%

Connecticut
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Delaware
2025 State Scorecard Average

100%

Florida
2025 State Scorecard Average

28%

Georgia
2025 State Scorecard Average

34%

Hawaii
2025 State Scorecard Average

98%

Idaho
2025 State Scorecard Average

2%

Illinois
2025 State Scorecard Average

81%

Indiana
2025 State Scorecard Average

22%

Iowa
2025 State Scorecard Average

2%

Kansas
2025 State Scorecard Average

23%

Kentucky
2025 State Scorecard Average

19%

Louisiana
2025 State Scorecard Average

38%

Maine
2025 State Scorecard Average

76%

Maryland
2025 State Scorecard Average

85%

Massachusetts
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Michigan
2025 State Scorecard Average

44%

Minnesota
2025 State Scorecard Average

50%

Mississippi
2025 State Scorecard Average

25%

Missouri
2025 State Scorecard Average

25%

Montana
2025 State Scorecard Average

2%

Nebraska
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Nevada
2025 State Scorecard Average

69%

New Hampshire
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

New Jersey
2025 State Scorecard Average

73%

New Mexico
2025 State Scorecard Average

93%

New York
2025 State Scorecard Average

72%

North Carolina
2025 State Scorecard Average

26%

North Dakota
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Ohio
2025 State Scorecard Average

33%

Oklahoma
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Oregon
2025 State Scorecard Average

82%

Pennsylvania
2025 State Scorecard Average

47%

Rhode Island
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

South Carolina
2025 State Scorecard Average

14%

South Dakota
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Tennessee
2025 State Scorecard Average

10%

Texas
2025 State Scorecard Average

31%

Utah
2025 State Scorecard Average

1%

Vermont
2025 State Scorecard Average

100%

Virginia
2025 State Scorecard Average

58%

Washington
2025 State Scorecard Average

75%

West Virginia
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Wisconsin
2025 State Scorecard Average

25%

Wyoming
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%