Joseph Lieberman on Environment Democratic Jr Senator (CT, retiring 2012), ran for V.P. with Gore, ran for president 2004

Enforce existing laws & reduce threats to air & water

A: George Bush has been the worst environmental president in our history-much worse than his father. Environmental protection has always been a passion and priority of mine. That means enforcing the environmental laws that are on the books now, protecting our national open space and wildlife treasures and protecting people’s health from the threat of environmental pollution in the air and the water.

Texas is last in social programs; but first in pollution

Gore and Lieberman carried out the second day of a bus caravan in the Great Lakes region. They drove through the heart of the state, holding rallies in Green Bay and Waukesha, and occasionally pausing in small towns and rural junctions to greet pockets of supporters.

Religion is the foundation of environmentalism

Continue strong commitment to clean air, water, land

Strengthen CAA; protect ANWR; create more national parks

Lieberman’s accomplishments includeProtecting the Environment:
• Strengthening Clean Air standards and cracking down on illegal polluters
• Leading the fight against extreme “regulatory reform” legislation that would undercut our ability to protect natural resources
• Fighting to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska from oil drilling; Creating Connecticut’s first national park at Weir Farm; Promoting national wildlife refuges along the Connecticut River

Advocates for robust environmental protections

Strengthen Clean Air Act & Clean Energy Act

Lieberman also is an original sponsor of the Clean Energy Act, which would require utilities to control multiple pollutants - carbon dioxide, mercury, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides - to create a level playing field for utilities as the electricity industry is restructured.

Invest $2.5B in open space preservation

$85M over 5 years for brownfield re-development

Hartford has been working with the EPA to identify and assess potential brownfields cleanup sites. Stamford’s grant will be used to cleanup three contaminated sites, and to train 35 low-income residents to participate in the brownfields redevelopment.

Lieberman is a cosponsors of the Brownfields Environmental Cleanup Act of 1999, which would replicate projects demonstrated in Stamford and Hartford across the nation. It would provide $85 million in funding over the next five years to help state and local governments inventory and assess contaminated sites and to capitalize revolving loan funds to help finance these cleanup projects.

Voted YES on $2 billion more for Cash for Clunkers program.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. OBEY (D, WI-7): The cash for clunkers program has proven even more wildly popular than its strongest supporters had predicted. Just last month, Congress passed the program, which provided up to $4,500 if you trade in your old gas guzzler for a new car that gets better mileage. That was done in the hopes of spurring some new car sales and encouraging people to be a little more environmentally friendly. We provided $1 billion in the supplemental to get it going, enough for about 250,000 sales--which was just about exhausted in one week. This bill transfers $2 billion from the Department of Energy's Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee program, which doesn't expect to award funding until late next year.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. LEWIS (R, CA-41): In the majority's haste to slam legislation with no time for consideration or amendments, we are now seeing the effects of such shortsighted martial law tactics.

Senator Feinstein tried to negotiate some changes to improve the program but was told that it was this way or the highway. Not one hearing on the Cash for Clunkers program, not one hearing on how the first billion dollars has been spent, not one hearing on how much money the program will need to get through the fiscal year.

Many of my colleagues will say, This is a great program, and it is necessary for the revitalization of the car industry. I'm not really going to argue with those goals. However, are we sure this program is working like it's supposed to? I don't think so. This program has only been up and running 1 week. If that is how the government is going to handle billion-dollar programs affecting all Americans, I ask, Whatever will we do if the administration takes control of our health care system?

Voted NO on prohibiting eminent domain for use as parks or grazing land.

• public utility
• road or other right of way
• an aqueduct or pipeline
• a prison or hospital
• national disaster

Proponents support voting YES because:

Sen. CRAIG: "Eminent domain was elevated greatly as an issue following a highly controversial 2005 Supreme Court decision known as Kelo vs. The City of New London. Since that decision, we as a nation have allowed state & local governments to utilize eminent domain to force landowners to yield their property to private development. Farmers and ranchers in particular have become vulnerable to state and local governments taking their property for economic development or open space designations. My amendment is a very targeted amendment. It addresses only cases in which private working agricultural land is taken and turned into public open space."

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Sen. HARKIN: This amendment doesn't reach the Kelo decision [because Kelo was about taking open space for private development]. Under this amendment they can still do that.

CRAIG. Oh, I disagree totally. We reach a portion of Kelo that is now most frequently impacting farms and ranches, and that is open space for open space.

HARKIN. The amendment has the Federal Government telling a local government what it can and cannot do within its own jurisdiction.

Letter from the National Conference of State Legislatures & US Conference of Mayors:

"This amendment is not only ill-advised, but it is also unconstitutional [because it] preempts state & local land use laws. The 5th Amendment expressly permits the taking of private property for public use provided just compensation is provided to the owner. The power of eminent domain has always been, and should remain, a state and local power."

Voted YES on including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations.

• Limits smokestack emissions in a two-phase program founded on a market based capping system
• Calls for the first cap to limit mercury emissions to 38 tons in 2010
• Requires the second and final cap to begin in 2018 and stay fix at 15 tons

Voted NO on confirming Gale Norton as Secretary of Interior.

Voted NO on more funding for forest roads and fish habitat.

Voted YES on transportation demo projects.

Voted YES on reducing funds for road-building in National Forests.

Voted YES on continuing desert protection in California.

Voted YES on requiring EPA risk assessments.

End commercial whaling and illegal trade in whale meat.

Expresses the sense of the Senate that the United States:
• at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the International Whaling Commission, should remain firmly opposed to commercial whaling,
• should initiate and support efforts to ensure that all activities conducted under reservations to the Commission's moratorium or sanctuaries are ceased,
• should oppose the lethal taking of whales for scientific purposes unless it is specifically authorized by the Scientific Committee of the Commission,
• should seek the Commission's support for specific efforts by member nations to end illegal trade in whale meat, and
• should support the permanent protection of whale populations through the establishment of whale sanctuaries in which commercial whaling is prohibited;
• At the 12th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, should oppose all efforts to reopen international trade in whale meat or to downlist any whale population; and
• should make full use of all appropriate diplomatic mechanisms, relevant international laws and agreements, and other appropriate mechanisms to implement these goals.

Support UNCED Rio Declaration at 2002 conference.

Expresses the sense of the Senate that having the President lead the U.S. delegation at the World Summit on Sustainable Development would send a strong signal of U.S. support.

Calls for the United States to: (1) take specified steps at the Summit, such as reaffirming its support for the implementation of commitments entered into at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), supporting efforts to improve the institutional structure for implementing the framework created by Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, remaining firmly opposed to commercial whaling, and supporting measures to increase the use of renewable sources of energy worldwide; and (2) provide leadership and pursue the negotiation of international agreements to address global climate change and to protect the marine environment.

Urges the President to identify priority international environmental agreements that the United States has signed during and following the UNCED that the Administration will present to the Senate for ratification.

Rated 42% by the LCV, indicating a mixed record on environment.

The League of Conservation Voters (LCV) is the political voice of the national environmental movement and the only organization devoted full-time to shaping a pro-environment Congress and White House. We run tough and effective campaigns to defeat anti-environment candidates, and support those leaders who stand up for a clean, healthy future for America. Through our National Environmental Scorecard and Presidential Report Card we hold Congress and the Administration accountable for their actions on the environment. Through regional offices, we build coalitions, promote grassroots power, and train the next generation of environmental leaders. The 2003 National Environmental Scorecard provides objective, factual information about the environmental voting records of all Members of the first session of the 108th Congress. This Scorecard represents the consensus of experts from 20 respected environmental and conservation organizations who selected the key votes on which Members of Congress should be graded. LCV scores votes on the most important issues of the year, including environmental health and safety protections, resource conservation, and spending for environmental programs. Scores are calculated by dividing the number of pro-environment votes by the total number of votes scored. The votes included in this Scorecard presented Members of Congress with a real choice on protecting the environment and help distinguish which legislators are working for environmental protection. Except in rare circumstances, the Scorecard excludes consensus action on the environment and issues on which no recorded votes occurred.

EPA must do better on mercury clean-up.

To: Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Dear Administrator Leavitt:

We are writing to urge you to take prompt and effective action to clean up mercury pollution from power plants. The EPA’s current proposals on mercury fall far short of what the law requires, and they fail to protect the health of our children and our environment. We ask you to carry out the requirements of the Clean Air Act to protect our nation from toxic mercury contamination.

On January 30, 2004, EPA proposed two alternative rules to address mercury emissions. Unfortunately, both of these proposals fail to meet the Clean Air Act directives for cleaning up mercury. EPA's proposals permit far more mercury pollution, and for years longer, than the Clean Air Act allows.

The toxicity of mercury has been proven time and again by scientists around the world. The Agency's own scientists just released a study finding that approximately 630,000 infants were born in the US in the 12-month period, 1999-2000, with blood mercury levels higher than what is considered safe. This is a doubling of previous estimates.

The newest scientific studies show that controlling mercury emissions works. As we saw in Florida, sharp reductions in mercury pollution are mirrored by reductions in nearby fish populations. A study in northern Wisconsin indicated that reductions in the input of mercury from air corresponded with marked reductions in mercury fish tissue levels in the 1990s.

As the Administrator of the EPA, you have the legal authority and the responsibility to address mercury emissions and protect public health. We do not believe that EPA's current proposals are sufficient or defensible. We urge you to withdraw the entire proposed rule package and re-propose a rule for adequate public comment that meets the terms of the 1998 settlement agreement and is promulgated by the December 15, 2004 deadline.

Promote conservation of rare felids & canids.

To assist in the conservation of rare felids and rare canids by supporting and providing financial resources for the conservation programs of nations within the range of rare felid and rare canid populations and projects of persons with demonstrated expertise in the conservation of rare felid and rare canid populations. Congress finds the following:

• Many wild populations of felids and canids, once considered common, are in decline, and many have declined to the point that their long-term survival in the wild is in serious jeopardy.
• Of the 37 wild felid species worldwide, all are currently recognized as species in need of protection. Of the 35 wild canid species worldwide, nearly 50% are recognized as in need of such protection.
• In addition to their intrinsic value, felids and canids are important aesthetic, economic, and ecological global resources that need to be conserved.
• Large felids and canids are considered both keystone and indicator species. Healthy populations of these species act as an important indicator of the integrity of entire ecosystems.
• Rare felids and rare canids face an array of threats, including loss of habitat and natural prey, intentional and unintentional takings by humans, disease transmission, and a vast number of other threats. These threats need to be addressed in a coordinated fashion.
• The purposes of this Act are to provide financial resources and to foster international cooperation (1) to restore and perpetuate healthy populations of rare felids and rare canids in the wild; and (2) to assist in the conservation of rare felid and rare canid populations worldwide.
• Related bills: H.R.1913, S.1033

Grants for beach water pollution under Clean Water Act.

Beach Protection Act of 2008 - Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (popularly known as the Clean Water Act) to include among eligible grant activities the development and implementation of programs for source tracking, sanitary surveys, and prevention efforts to address the identified sources of beach water pollution. Requires grant recipients to identify:

1. the use of a rapid testing method;
2. measures for communication within 24 hours of the results of a water sample concerning pollutants to specified officials with authority to require the prevention or treatment of the sources of beach water pollution;
3. measures to develop and implement a beach water pollution source identification and tracking program for the coastal recreation waters that are not meeting applicable water quality standards for pathogens; and
4. a publicly accessible and searchable global information system database with information updated within 24 hours of its availability, organized by beach and with defined standards, sampling plan, monitoring protocols, sampling results, and number and cause of beach closing and advisory days.
5. Legislative Outcome: Related bills: H.R.2537, S.1506. Senate Reports: 110-414. Source: Beach Protection Act (S.2844) 08-S2844 on Apr 10, 2008

   Make tax deduction permanent for conservation easements.

   Lieberman signed H.R.1831 & S.812

   Amends the Internal Revenue Code to make permanent the tax deduction for charitable contributions by individuals and corporations of real property interests for conservation purposes. Known in the Senate as the Rural Heritage Conservation Extension Act of 2009.

   Source: Conservation Easement Incentive Act 09-HR1831 on Mar 31, 2009

   Regulate all dog breeders down to kennels of 50 dogs.

   Lieberman co-sponsored PUPS: Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act

   Congressional Summary:Amends the Animal Welfare Act to define a "high volume retail breeder" as a person who, in commerce, for compensation or profit: has an ownership interest in or custody of one or more breeding female dogs; and sells more than 50 of the offspring of such dogs for use as pets in any one-year period. Considers such a breeder of dogs to be a dealer.

   Promulgates requirements for the exercise of dogs at facilities owned or operated by high volume retail breeders, including requiring daily access to exercise that allows the dogs to move sufficiently in a way that is not forced, repetitive, or restrictive; and is in an area that is spacious, cleaned at least once a day, free of infestation by pests or vermin, and designed to prevent the dogs from escaping.

   Opponent's Comments (GSDCA, the German Shepherd Dog Club of America):In the past, legislation has excluded home/hobby breeders. This bill would, for the first time, require home/hobby breeders to follow the strict USDA requirements, such as engineering standards designed for large commercial kennels and not homes. Such regulations would exceedingly difficult to meet in a home/residential breeding environment. If passed, PUPS would disastrously reduce purposely-bred pups for the public.

   There is nothing in this bill that changes the status of already known substandard kennel violators. There is no increase in funding for additional inspectors, nor is increased inspection evaluation education included.

   Dogs purposely bred for showing, trialing or other events often are not bred for several years due to many different reasons. Some of these dogs may never be bred, yet are included in the count.

   Working kennels maintain a large dog population while they are evaluating dogs; if the dogs do not work out for the purpose for which they were intended, they are often sold as pets. This could bring those working/training kennels under USDA regulations.

   Source: HR835/S707 11-S0707 on Feb 28, 2011

   Prohibit invasive research on great apes.

   Lieberman signed Great Ape Protection and Cost Savings Act

   The Great Ape Protection and Cost Savings Act prohibits:

   1. conducting invasive research on great apes
   2. possessing, maintaining, or housing a great ape for the purpose of conducting invasive research
   3. using federal funds to conduct such research on a great ape or to support an entity conducting invasive research either within or outside of the US
   4. knowingly breeding a great ape for the purpose of conducting or facilitating such research
   5. transporting or selling a great ape in interstate or foreign commerce for conducting or facilitating such research.
   • Defines "great ape" as any chimpanzee, bonobo, gorilla, orangutan, or gibbon.
   • Defines "invasive research" as research that may cause death, injury, pain, distress, fear, or trauma to great apes, including drug testing or exposure to a substance or isolation, or social deprivation.
   • Requires the permanent retirement of all great apes that are owned by the federal government and that are being maintained in any facility for the purpose of breeding for, holding for, or conducting invasive research.
   • Sets forth civil penalties for violations of this Act.
   • Establishes in the Treasury the Great Ape Sanctuary System Fund to be administered for construction, renovation, and operation of the sanctuary system for surplus chimpanzees.
   Source: S.810&HR1513 11-S0810 on Apr 13, 2011

   Prohibits breeding or possessing Big Cat species.

   Lieberman co-sponsored Big Cats and Public Safety Protection Act
   • Prohibits any person from importing, exporting, transporting, selling, receiving, acquiring, purchasing, breeding, possessing, or owning any prohibited wildlife species (current law prohibits importing, exporting, transporting, selling, receiving, acquiring, or purchasing such a species in interstate or foreign commerce).
   • Defines "breeding" as facilitating the reproduction of prohibited wildlife species (any live species of lion, tiger, leopard, cheetah, jaguar, or cougar or any hybrid of such species) for commercial use.
   • Defines a list of exemptions to such prohibition by authorized persons.
   • Includes in the list of persons authorized to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, breed, possess, own, or purchase such species a wildlife sanctuary or a zoo accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums; and a person that is in possession of animals of such species that were born before the date of this Act's enactment.
   Source: H4122/S3547 12-HR4122 on Mar 9, 2012

   Establish an International Conservation Strategy.

   Lieberman co-sponsored Global Conservation Act

   Requires a report to Congress on existing US international conservation policies and programs to determine the extent to which such programs are:

   • addressing natural resource challenges to ensure healthy and sustainable supplies of water, wildlife, fish, forests, plants, and other critical resources;
   • advancing US foreign policy priorities in areas such as security, democratization, sustainable food production, and clean water;
   • enhancing economic and wildlife conservation benefits derived from properly managed international hunting and angling tourism;
   • addressing poaching, illegal logging, fishing, and wildlife trafficking;
   • Establishes the Interagency Working Group on Global Conservation to strengthen the capacity of the US to collaborate with other countries, international organizations, the private sector, and private voluntary organizations to conserve natural resources and enhance biodiversity.
   • Working Group will establish a International Conservation Strategy to provide a comprehensive plan of action that identifies specific and measurable benchmarks, goals, and time frames
   • Prohibits any provision in this Act from being construed as restricting, limiting, or otherwise impairing properly managed recreational hunting and angling, or (2) the ability of any foreign jurisdiction or authority to authorize regulated programs supporting wildlife for local consumption and commercialization.
   Source: H6038/S3356 12-HR6038 on Jun 27, 2012

   Rated 100% by HSLF, indicating a pro-animal welfare voting record.

   Lieberman scores 100% by the Humane Society on animal rights issues

   112th Mid-Term Humane Scorecard: The Humane Society Legislative Fund has posted the final version of the 2011 Humane Scorecard, where you can track the performance of your federal lawmakers on key animal protection issues during last year. We rated legislators based on their voting behavior on measures such as agribusiness subsidies, lethal predator control, and the Endangered Species Act; their cosponsorship of priority bills on puppy mills, horse slaughter, animal fighting, and chimps in research; their support for funding the enforcement of animal welfare laws; and their leadership on animal protection. All of the priority bills whose cosponsorships we're counting enjoy strong bipartisan support; in the House, each of the four now has more than 150 cosponsors.

   The Humane Scorecard is not a perfect measuring tool, but creating some reasonable yardstick and allowing citizens to hold lawmakers accountable is central to our work. When the Humane Scorecard comes out each year, it helps clarify how the animal protection movement is doing geographically, by party affiliation, and in other categories. It helps us chart our course for animals by seeing where we have been effective, and where we need to improve.

   Source: HSLF website 12-HumaneS on Jan 13, 2012

   Strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting.

   Lieberman co-sponsored strengthening prohibitions against animal fighting

   Sen. CANTWELL. I reintroduce today the Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007. This legislation has won the unanimous approval of the Senate several times, but unfortunately has not yet reached the finish line.

   There is no doubt, animal fighting is terribly cruel. Dogs and roosters are drugged to make them hyper-aggressive and forced to keep fighting even after suffering severe injuries such as punctured eyes and pierced lungs. It's all done for "entertainment" and illegal gambling. Some dogfighters steal pets to use as bait for training their dogs, while others allow trained fighting dogs to roam neighborhoods and endanger the public.

   The Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act will strengthen current law by making the interstate transport of animals for the purpose of fighting a felony and increase the punishment to three years of jail time. This is necessary because the current misdemeanor penalty has proven ineffective--considered a "cost of doing business" by those in the animal fighting industry which continues unabated nationwide.

   These enterprises depend on interstate commerce, as evidenced by the animal fighting magazines that advertise and promote them. Our bill also makes it a felony to move cockfighting implements in interstate or foreign commerce. These are razor-sharp knives known as "slashers" and ice pick-like gaffs designed exclusively for cockfights and attached to the birds' legs for fighting.

   This is long overdue legislation. It's time to get this felony animal fighting language enacted. It's time for Congress to strengthen the federal law so that it can provide as a meaningful deterrent against animal fighting. Our legislation does not expand the federal government's reach into a new area, but simply aims to make current law more effective. It is explicitly limited to interstate and foreign commerce, so it protects states' rights in the two states where cockfighting is still allowed.

   Source: Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act (S.261/H.R.137) 2007-S261 on Jan 4, 2007

   Click here for definitions & background information on Environment. Click here for a Wikipedia profile of Joseph Lieberman. Click here for a Ballotpedia profile of Joseph Lieberman. Click here for SenateMatch quiz answers by Joseph Lieberman. Click here for AmericansElect quiz answers by Joseph Lieberman. Click here for MyOcracy quiz answers by Joseph Lieberman. Click here for a summary of Joseph Lieberman's positions on all issues. Click here for issue positions of other CT politicians. Click here for issue statements from CT archives.
   Other candidates on Environment:		Joseph Lieberman on other issues:
   CT Gubernatorial: Dan Malloy David Walker Tom Foley CT Senatorial: Chris Murphy Richard Blumenthal CT politicians CT Archives Retiring in 2014 election: GA:Chambliss(R) IA:Harkin(D) MI:Levin(D) MT:Baucus(D) NE:Johanns(R) SD:Johnson(D) WV:Rockefeller(D) Retired as of Jan. 2013: AZ:Kyl(R) CT:Lieberman(D) HI:Akaka(D) ME:Snowe(R) ND:Conrad(D) NE:Nelson(D) NM:Bingaman(D) TX:Hutchison(R) VA:Webb(D) WI:Kohl(D)	Senate Retirements 2014: GA:Chambliss(R) IA:Harkin(D) MI:Levin(D) MT:Baucus(D) NE:Johanns(R) OK:Coburn(R) SD:Johnson(D) WV:Rockefeller(D) Senate races Nov. 2014: AK: Begich(D) vs.Miller(R) vs.Treadwell(R) vs.Sullivan(R) AL: Sessions(R,unopposed) AR: Pryor(D) vs.Cotton(R) CO: Udall(D) vs.Gardner(R) vs.Baumgardner(R) vs.Buck(R) vs.Hill(R) vs.Stephens(R) DE: Coons(D) vs.O`Donnell(R) GA: Nunn(D) vs.Perdue(R) vs.Kingston(R) vs.Gingrey(R) vs.Handel(R) vs.Broun(R) HI: Schatz(D) vs.Hanabusa(D) vs.Cavasso(R) IA: Braley(D) vs.Ernst(R) vs.Whitaker(R) vs.Clovis(R) ID: Risch(R) vs.Mitchell(D) IL: Durbin(D) vs.Oberweis(R) vs.Hansen(L) vs.Truax(R) KS: Roberts(R) vs.Tiahrt(R) vs.Wolf(R) vs.Taylor(D) vs.Orman(I) KY: McConnell(R) vs.Bevin(R) vs.Grimes(D) LA: Landrieu(D) vs.Cassidy(R) vs.Maness(R) MA: Markey(D) vs.Herr(R) vs.Skarin(I) vs.Gomez(R) ME: Collins(R) vs.D`Amboise(R) vs.Bellows(D)	MI: Land(R) vs.Peters(D) vs.Wiedenhoeft(R) MN: Franken(D) vs.McFadden(R) vs.Abeler(R) vs.Ortman(R) MS: Cochran(R) vs.Childers(D) vs.McDaniel(R) MT: Walsh(D) vs.Daines(R) vs.Edmunds(R) vs.Bohlinger(D) NC: Hagan(D) vs.Tillis(R) NE: Sasse(R) vs.Domina(D) vs.Haugh(L) vs.Osborn(R) NH: Shaheen(D) vs.Brown(R) vs.Smith(R) vs.Rubens(R) vs.Testerman(R) vs.Martin(R) NJ: Booker(D) vs.Bell(R) vs.Sabrin(R) NM: Udall(D) vs.Weh(R) vs.Clements(R) OK-2: Lankford(R) vs.Johnson(D) vs.Shannon(R) OK-6: Inhofe(R) vs.Silverstein(D) OR: Merkley(D) vs.Wehby(R) vs.Conger(R) RI: Reed(D) vs.Zaccaria(R) SC-2: Scott(R) vs.Dickerson(D) vs.Wade(D) SC-6: Graham(R) vs.Hutto(D) vs.Ravenel(I) vs.Stamper(D) vs.Mace(R) vs.Bright(R) SD: Rounds(R) vs.Weiland(D) vs.Pressler(I) TN: Alexander(R) vs.Carr(R) vs.Adams(D) TX: Cornyn(R) vs.Alameel(D) vs.Roland(L) vs.Stockman(R) VA: Warner(D) vs.Gillespie(R) vs.Sarvis(L) WV: Capito(R) vs.Tennant(D) vs.Raese(R) vs.McGeehan(R) WY: Enzi(R) vs.Cheney(R) vs.Hardy(D)	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Jobs Principles Social Security Tax Reform Technology War/Peace Welfare Other Senators Senate Votes (analysis) Bill Sponsorships Affiliations Policy Reports Group Ratings
   Contact info: Email Contact Form Phone number: (202) 224-4041

   
   
   
   
   
   Page last updated: Aug 08, 2014