Jeff Landry on Environment

Rated 6% by the LCV, indicating anti-environment votes.

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.

Stop considering manure as pollutant or hazardous.

Congressional Summary:Amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) to exclude manure from the definition of `hazardous substance` and `pollutant or contaminant` for purposes of such Act. Defines `manure` to mean:

1. digestive emissions, feces, urine, urea and other excrement from livestock;
2. any associated bedding, compost, raw materials or other materials commingled with such excrement from livestock;
3. any process water associated with such items; and
4. any byproducts, constituents, or substances contained in, or originating from, such items or any emissions relating to such items.

Opponent`s Comments (Jim Ruen on AgProfessional.com, Oct. 3, 2011): Since when can a fertilizer dealer operate without concern for environmental regulation and impact? Let`s face it, we aren`t talking about Ma and Pa Kettle with their six milk cows and three sows here spreading a load of manure on the back 40. We are talking about CAFO units with thousands of animals and tens of thousands or more tons/gallons of manure. While a few maybe spreading on their own land, most are selling it to area farmers. At a time when fertilizer dealers and companies have to be conspicuously careful with how they handle product, why shouldn`t mega-livestock operators be equally regulated as they sell their `waste` product for its nutrient and soil building value. Since when do commercial N, P and K producers or handlers get a free ride from the EPA...or Congress?

Member of House Natural Resources Committee.

The U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources, or Natural Resources Committee, has jurisdiction over issues of:

• Fisheries and wildlife, including research, restoration, refuges, and conservation.
• Forfeiture of land grants and alien ownership, including alien ownership of mineral lands.
• United States Geological Survey.
• International fishing agreements.
• Interstate compacts relating to apportionment of waters for irrigation purposes.
• Irrigation and reclamation, including water supply for reclamation projects and easements of public lands for irrigation projects; and acquisition of private lands when necessary to complete irrigation projects.
• Native Americans generally, including the care and allotment of Native American lands and general and special measures relating to claims that are paid out of Native American funds.
• Insular possessions of the United States generally (except those affecting the revenue and appropriations).
• Military parks and battlefields, national cemeteries administered by the Secretary of the Interior, parks within the District of Columbia, and the erection of monuments to the memory of individuals.
• Mineral land laws and claims and entries thereunder.
• Mineral resources of public lands, including the Outer Continental Shelf.
• Mining interests generally.
• Mining schools and experimental stations.
• Marine affairs, including coastal zone management (except for measures relating to oil and other pollution of navigable waters).
• Oceanography.
• Petroleum conservation on public lands and conservation of the radium supply in the United States.
• Preservation of prehistoric ruins and objects of interest on the public domain.
• Public lands generally, including entry, easements, and grazing thereon.
• Relations of the United States with Native Americans and Native American tribes.
• Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline (except ratemaking).

Rated 0% by HSLF, indicating an anti-animal welfare voting record.

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.

Click here for definitions & background information on Environment. Click here for a summary of all issue stances of Jeff Landry. Click here for a Wikipedia profile of Jeff Landry. Click here for a Ballotpedia profile of Jeff Landry. Click here for VoteMatch responses by Jeff Landry. Click here for issue positions of other LA politicians. Click here for LA primary archives. Click here for LA secondary archives.
Other governors on Environment:			Jeff Landry on other issues:
[Title7]	Gubernatorial Debates 2023: KY: Incumbent Andy Beshear(D) vs.State A.G. Daniel Cameron(R) vs.Ambassador Kelly Craft(R) vs.State Auditor Mike Harmon(R) LA: Incumbent John Bel Edwards(D,term-limited) vs.Jeff Landry(R) vs.Shawn Wilson(D) vs.John Schroder(R) vs.Sharon Hewitt(R) MS: Incumbent Tate Reeves(R) vs.Bill Waller(R,withdrew) vs.Brandon Presley(D) Gubernatorial Debates 2024: DE: Gov. John Carney (D, term-limited); vs. Lt. Gov. Bethany Hall-Long (D) vs. Matt Meyer (D) vs. State Rep.Mike Ramone (R) IN: Gov. Eric Holcomb (R, term-limited); vs. Sen. Mike Braun (R) vs. Suzanne Crouch (R) vs. Jennifer McCormick (D) MO: Gov. Mike Parson (R, term-limited): vs. Jay Ashcroft (R) vs. Bill Eigel (R) vs. Mike Kehoe (R) vs. Crystal Quade (D) MT: Gov. Greg Gianforte (R) vs. Ryan Busse (D) vs. Tanner Smith (R, lost June 4 primary)	Gubernatorial Debates 2024 (continued): NC: Gov. Roy Cooper (D, term-limited); vs. Mark Robinson (R) vs. Josh Stein (D) vs. Dale Folwell (R, lost March 5 primary) vs. Michael Morgan (D, lost March 5 primary) vs. Andy Wells (R,withdrew) ND: Gov. Doug Burgum (R, retiring) vs. State Rep. Rick Becker (R) vs. U.S.Rep.Kelly Armstrong (R) vs. State Sen.Merrill Piepkorn (D) NH: Gov. Chris Sununu (R, retiring) vs. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R) vs. Joyce Craig (D) vs. Chuck Morse (R) vs. Cinde Warmington (D) UT: Gov. Spencer Cox (R) vs. State Rep. Phil Lyman (R) vs. Minority Leader Brian King (D) VT: Gov. Phil Scott (R) vs. Selectman Peter Duval (D) vs. Commissioner Esther Charlestin (D) WA: Gov. Jay Inslee (D, retiring); vs. WA Attorney General Bob Ferguson (D) vs. U.S.Rep.Dave Reichert (R) vs. State Sen. Mark Mullet (D) vs. County Chair Semi Bird (R) vs. Hilary Franz (D, withdrew) WV: Gov. Jim Justice (R, term-limited); vs. WV Attorney General Patrick Morrisey (R) vs. Huntington Mayor Steve Williams (D) vs. WV State Auditor JB McCuskey (R, withdrew) vs. WV Secretary of State Mac Warner (R, lost May 14 primary) vs. State Del. Moore Capito (R, lost May 14 primary)	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families/Children Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Infrastructure/Technology Jobs Local Issues Principles/Values Social Security Tax Reform War/Iraq/Mideast Welfare/Poverty [Title9]