International Family Planning

Senate Roll Call Vote 35

1996 Scorecard Vote

Pro-environment vote

No

Votes For

43

Votes Against

52

Not Voting

5

Issues

Stabilizing human population growth around the globe is crucial to environmentally sustainable development, and the U.S. has helped fund voluntary family planning programs to achieve this goal. While opponents of such programs raise concerns over funding for abortion, U.S. law prohibits the use of foreign assistance funds for this purpose.

Congress approved deep cuts in the fiscal year 1996 budget for international family planning assistance and imposed restrictions on spending the scarce remaining funds, as part of a stop-gap funding bill to keep the government operating (H.R. 2880, 1/26/96). The $76 million that was appropriated constitutes an effective reduction of 87 percent from the 1995 budget for international family planning programs. On a subsequent spending bill (H.R. 3019), Appropriations Committee Chairman Mark Hatfield (R-OR) added a provision to lift those restrictions and restore funding in cases where the President certified that the restrictions would reduce access to family planning and increase the incidence of abortion.

Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-KS) offered an amendment to strike the Hatfield language. On March 14, 1996, the Senate rejected the amendment, 43 – 52. NO is the pro-environment vote.

On April 26, 1996, President Clinton signed H.R. 3019 into law.

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%