Stopping the Timber Giveaway

House Roll Call Vote 323

1993 Scorecard Vote

Pro-environment vote

Yes

Votes For

164

Votes Against

259

Not Voting

10

The federal government has sanctioned tremendous environmental damage through its proposals to send or give away timber on public lands. The resulting clear-cutting destroys wildlife habitat. New logging roads slice through the last large unprotected tracts of undeveloped forests. Silt runs off roads, clogging valuable trout and salmon streams and threatening commercial fisheries that contribute over $1 billion to the nation’s economy. The silt invades clean water supplies for homes and industries.

To make matters worse, taxpayers lost nearly $1.1 billion in the last five years on below-cost timber sales from federal lands. The Forest Service not only sells timber below its cost of preparing it for sale, but subsidizes the construction of an extensive network of roads to get the logs out. According to testimony before Congress, these activities waste a major portion of taxpayers dollars given to the Forest Service. In fiscal 1992 alone, the losses reached $350 million in 101 national forests.

In an amendment to the fiscal 1994 Interior Appropriations bill, Rep. John Potter (R-IL), joined by Reps. Mike Synar (D-OK) and Lynn Schenk (D-CA), attempted to cut funding for the Forest Service by $11.9 million to discourage these destructive below-cost timber sales. The Porter amendment was rejected 164-262 on July 14, 1993. YES is the pro-environmental 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%