Funding Energy Efficiency Programs

House Roll Call Vote 313

1998 Scorecard Vote

Pro-environment vote

Yes

Votes For

212

Votes Against

213

Not Voting

9

The extraction, refinement, and burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas) constitutes the largest source of air pollution in the world and, in the United States, accounts for 98% of all carbon dioxide emissions–the chief contributor to global warming–and 95% of all other air pollution. Meanwhile, commercial nuclear power plants produce 95% of the country’s radioactive waste–waste for which there is no permanent safe disposal method.

Energy efficiency programs are considered the single most effective means of reducing energy use and energy-related pollution. Energy efficiency improvements now save U.S. consumers $150 billion to $200 billion a year. The Department of Energy (DOE) has played a particularly important role in developing energy-efficient technologies– spearheading major innovations in lighting, window and building design, industrial energy efficiency, and automotive design. If all the DOE’s energy efficiency programs were funded at the level requested by the Clinton administration, it is estimated that the U.S. would cut its carbon dioxide emissions 136 million tons by the year 2010. This could take the U.S. more than 25% of the way toward meeting the carbon reductions required under the Kyoto protocol.

During consideration of the Fiscal Year 1999 Interior appropriations bill, the House Appropriations Committee cut energy efficiency funding $25 million below Fiscal Year 1998 levels and more than $200 million below the President’s requested budget. Reps. David Skaggs (D-CO) and Jon Fox (R-PA) offered an amendment to cut $44.5 million from other programs, mostly related to fossil energy, to fund increases in energy efficiency programs.

On July 21, 1998, the House rejected the amendment, 212- 213, after the gavel to close voting was delayed by 10 minutes, giving amendment opponents time to lobby other members to change their votes. YES is the pro-environment vote. A subsequent revised amendment restored funding to both fossil energy and energy efficiency programs and was accepted on a voice vote before final passage of the bill.

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%