Weakening Land Use Protections — “Takings”

Senate Roll Call Vote 197

1998 Scorecard Vote

Pro-environment vote

No

Votes For

52

Votes Against

42

Not Voting

6

Sponsored by Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the Property Rights Implementation Act of 1998, S. 2271, combines two House-passed takings or so-called “property rights” bills. The bill contains language similar to H.R. 992 (as introduced) which would significantly amend most federal environmental laws, allow polluters to newly challenge long settled federal environmental protections and invite massive forum shopping by industries in search of responsive courts (See House vote 1).

S. 2271 also incorporates provisions of H.R. 1534 (LCV 1997 Scorecard, House vote 3). Like H.R. 1534, S. 2271 would override existing local procedures to allow developers to challenge city and county zoning and other property safeguards directly in the federal court system instead of through existing local administrative appeals and state courts.

The Supreme Court has held that land developers or other property owners must first try to resolve land disputes through local administrative appeals and in state courts before filing a lawsuit in federal court claiming a “taking” of private property. S. 2271 attempts to reverse these precedents to allow claimants to bypass local procedures and state courts. Small towns, cities, and counties would be pressured to avoid the costs of defending against premature and even meritless court challenges of local environmental and public health protections. Large developers could use the threat of expensive federal lawsuits to intimidate local communities into permitting inappropriate activities, such as corporate hog farms in floodplains and hazardous waste dumps in residential areas.

By combining these two proposals, S. 2271 would threaten both federal environmental laws and local zoning.

S. 2271 was opposed by virtually every state and local government organization, including the National Governors Association, National Association of Counties, National League of Cities, National Conference of State Legislatures, and the U.S. Conference of Mayors. Also opposing the bill were major religious organizations, including the U.S. Catholic Conference and the National Council of Churches, and national and local historic preservation, planning, labor, and conservation groups. Prior to the Senate vote, the Clinton administration threatened to veto the bill. Floor opposition was led by Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and John Chafee (R-RI).

On July 13, 1998, the Senate voted 52 – 42 on a motion to proceed to consideration of S. 2271–short of the 60 votes required to overcome a filibuster against the bill. (Senate debate on an issue can continue indefinitely without a final vote on passage unless 60 senators vote to invoke “cloture” to cut off debate.) 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
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Alaska
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Arizona
2024 State Scorecard Average

56%

Arkansas
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

California
2024 State Scorecard Average

99%

Colorado
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Connecticut
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Delaware
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Florida
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Georgia
2024 State Scorecard Average

94%

Hawaii
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Idaho
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Illinois
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Indiana
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Iowa
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Kansas
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Kentucky
2024 State Scorecard Average

6%

Louisiana
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Maine
2024 State Scorecard Average

50%

Maryland
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Massachusetts
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Michigan
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Minnesota
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Mississippi
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Missouri
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Montana
2024 State Scorecard Average

29%

Nebraska
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Nevada
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

New Hampshire
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

New Jersey
2024 State Scorecard Average

88%

New Mexico
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

New York
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

North Carolina
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

North Dakota
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Ohio
2024 State Scorecard Average

25%

Oklahoma
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Oregon
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Pennsylvania
2024 State Scorecard Average

94%

Rhode Island
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

South Carolina
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

South Dakota
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Tennessee
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Texas
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%

Utah
2024 State Scorecard Average

2%

Vermont
2024 State Scorecard Average

94%

Virginia
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

Washington
2024 State Scorecard Average

100%

West Virginia
2024 State Scorecard Average

6%

Wisconsin
2024 State Scorecard Average

50%

Wyoming
2024 State Scorecard Average

0%