Family Planning

House Roll Call Vote 115

2001 Scorecard Vote

Pro-environment vote

No

Votes For

218

Votes Against

210

Not Voting

3

Issues

According to the United Nations, in October 1999 the world’s population reached the 6 billion mark–doubling itself in a mere 40 years. This rapid population growth, which exacerbates pollution and accelerates the depletion of natural resources, is one of the most serious threats to a healthy and sustainable environment.

For more than three decades, the United States has worked to stabilize human population growth by contributing to voluntary family planning programs worldwide. By allowing women to plan the size of their families, these programs help to conserve natural resources, protect wildlife and habitat, and ultimately ensure a healthy world for future generations. In recent years, however, family planning opponents have cut federal funding for these programs by arguing, in part, that the money funds abortion. In fact, current law prohibits U.S. foreign assistance from funding abortion.

On his second day in office, President Bush reinstated restrictions on family planning funds that were in effect during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations. These restrictions bar U.S. family planning assistance to foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that use their own funds to provide legal abortion services or to participate in public debate over abortion laws or policies in their own countries.

These restrictions hamper the ability of the U.S. Agency for International Development to fund voluntary family planning and other reproductive health programs. Preliminary assessments by U.S. family planning organizations of the new policy’s impact on the ground suggest that many of the best local organizations, providing the most comprehensive family planning and reproductive health services, are among those most likely to be deprived of funding by the new restrictions. The restrictions also use the leverage of U.S. funds to silence discussion on a legitimate subject for public debate.

During consideration of the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 State Department authorization bill (H.R. 1646) in the House International Relations Committee, Representative Barbara Lee (D-CA) successfully introduced an amendment that overturned the Bush administration restrictions on family planning organizations. The Lee amendment prohibited the president from refusing to fund foreign NGOs solely because they provide medical services, including counseling and referral, that are legal in their countries and are legal in the United States.

Representatives Henry Hyde (R-IL) and Chris Smith (R-NJ) offered a motion on the House floor to strike the Lee amendment. On May 16, 2001, the House adopted the Hyde-Smith amendment, 218-210 (House roll call vote 115). NO is the pro-environment vote. The Senate version of the bill, S. 1401, included a provision that would have prevented the administration from carrying out the restriction on family planning aid. However, the House and Senate conferees removed the provision from their report due to a veto threat from the White House and passed the conference report in December. At press time, the president had not yet signed the bill.

Votes

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

Vote Key

Sort by
Alabama
2001 State Scorecard Average

15%

Alaska
2001 State Scorecard Average

58%

Arizona
2001 State Scorecard Average

30%

Arkansas
2001 State Scorecard Average

4%

California
2001 State Scorecard Average

75%

Colorado
2001 State Scorecard Average

52%

Connecticut
2001 State Scorecard Average

97%

Delaware
2001 State Scorecard Average

100%

Florida
2001 State Scorecard Average

30%

Georgia
2001 State Scorecard Average

35%

Hawaii
2001 State Scorecard Average

98%

Idaho
2001 State Scorecard Average

5%

Illinois
2001 State Scorecard Average

81%

Indiana
2001 State Scorecard Average

24%

Iowa
2001 State Scorecard Average

5%

Kansas
2001 State Scorecard Average

25%

Kentucky
2001 State Scorecard Average

20%

Louisiana
2001 State Scorecard Average

21%

Maine
2001 State Scorecard Average

71%

Maryland
2001 State Scorecard Average

83%

Massachusetts
2001 State Scorecard Average

96%

Michigan
2001 State Scorecard Average

54%

Minnesota
2001 State Scorecard Average

47%

Mississippi
2001 State Scorecard Average

24%

Missouri
2001 State Scorecard Average

21%

Montana
2001 State Scorecard Average

2%

Nebraska
2001 State Scorecard Average

4%

Nevada
2001 State Scorecard Average

72%

New Hampshire
2001 State Scorecard Average

88%

New Jersey
2001 State Scorecard Average

78%

New Mexico
2001 State Scorecard Average

94%

New York
2001 State Scorecard Average

63%

North Carolina
2001 State Scorecard Average

47%

North Dakota
2001 State Scorecard Average

0%

Ohio
2001 State Scorecard Average

33%

Oklahoma
2001 State Scorecard Average

3%

Oregon
2001 State Scorecard Average

68%

Pennsylvania
2001 State Scorecard Average

56%

Rhode Island
2001 State Scorecard Average

100%

South Carolina
2001 State Scorecard Average

17%

South Dakota
2001 State Scorecard Average

0%

Tennessee
2001 State Scorecard Average

13%

Texas
2001 State Scorecard Average

33%

Utah
2001 State Scorecard Average

6%

Vermont
2001 State Scorecard Average

100%

Virginia
2001 State Scorecard Average

55%

Washington
2001 State Scorecard Average

72%

West Virginia
2001 State Scorecard Average

0%

Wisconsin
2001 State Scorecard Average

24%

Wyoming
2001 State Scorecard Average

3%