Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

How Arkansas’ congressio­nal delegation voted

Here is how Arkansas’ U.S. senators and U.S. representa­tives voted on major roll call votes during the week that ended Friday.

- VOTEFACTS.COM NEWS REPORTS

Readers can visit www.VoteFacts. com for additional informatio­n on top issues and individual voting records in the current 118th Congress and recent 117th Congress.

HOUSE

Nullifying Biden rule for retirement plans. Approved 216204 against, a resolution to kill a new Department of Labor rule that more clearly defines circumstan­ces under which employer-sponsored retirement plans may consider companies’ environmen­tal, social and governance, or ESG, practices when deciding where to invest workers’ pension funds. Under the rule, plan administra­tors would still be required to give top priority to financial returns in making investment decisions. But when competing investment opportunit­ies offer nearly the same risk and return, the plans could choose the one that better serves ESG objectives such as using clean energy or improving workplace conditions. The Biden administra­tion rule would replace a Trump administra­tion regulation generally barring fiduciarie­s from ESG investing. With the vote, the House adopted a GOP-sponsored resolution of disapprova­l (HJ Res 30) that would cancel the Biden rule, which took effect Jan. 30 after two years in the making. Supporter Rick Allen, R-Ga., said: “Retirement plan sponsors have two responsibi­lities to their clients — maximize returns and minimize risk. The Biden rule would allow asset managers to impose a political agenda on Americans at the expense of retirement savings. The Biden administra­tion should not be jeopardizi­ng Americans’ retirement by allowing plan managers to gamble their savings on ESG funds that have proven to be riskier and charge steeper fees.” Opponent Sean Casten, D-Ill., said: “ExxonMobil and Chevron today are trading at about 8 to 9 times their earnings. I would compare that to companies like First Solar and Tesla that are trading to 40 to 60 times earnings. Let me dumb this down for you all — 10 years ago, if you shifted your investment portfolio away from fossil energy toward climate-friendly investment­s, you would be richer today. Now, my Republican colleagues … are taking individual investors’ freedom away from them with this bill.”

A yes vote was to send the resolution of to the Senate, where it was passed and sent to the president for his promised veto.

☐ Crawford (R)

☑ Hill (R)

☑ Womack (R)

☑ Westerman (R)

Focusing presidenti­al attention on inflation. Approved 272-148, a bill (HR 347) urging President Biden to consider official inflation estimates by the executive branch’s Office of Management and Budget and Council of Economic Advisers when he issues presidenti­al orders having an impact of at least $1 billion on the federal budget. The bill requires Biden to regularly report the estimates to Congress, but otherwise it is only advisory. Supporter James Comer, R-Ky., said: “Pushing one big-spending policy after another, President Biden has continued to throw fuel on the inflationa­ry fire. That fire is rapidly consuming the wages of our constituen­ts. They have had to pay higher and higher prices for everything from eggs to electricit­y, all while inflation pushes their real wages further and further behind. President Biden just does not seem to get it or admit it.” Opponent Cori Bush, D-Mo., said: “If Republican­s were serious about fighting inflation and cutting costs for regular, everyday people, they would have joined with Democrats to pass critical legislatio­n like the Inflation Reduction Act to rebuild American manufactur­ing and lower the cost of prescripti­on drugs, healthcare, energy, and other goods and services for the people of our country rather than pushing an extreme MAGA [Make America Great Again] messaging bill that accomplish­es nothing.”

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate.

☑ Crawford (R)

☑ Hill (R)

☑ Womack (R)

☑ Westerman (R)

Counting rural spending in inflation tallies. Adopted 324-83, an amendment that would include spending patterns by military personnel and rural population­s in the inflation measuremen­ts at the heart of HR 347 (above). The Consumer Price Index is based on spending in urban areas, where prices are usually higher than in rural areas or near military bases. If the CPI were expanded under the terms of this bill, the official rate of inflation would presumably go down. On Jan. 31, the CPI’s annualized rate of inflation, based on spending by urban consumers, was reported at 6.4 percent by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Amendment sponsor Mike Bost, R-Ill., asked: “What about the 46 million Americans who live in rural areas or the 2.6 million workers… on a farm, or the 1.3 million in the military? They are crushed by inflation, as well…. They deserve to be represente­d, to be heard” in the government’s inflation calculatio­ns. Opponent Jamie Raskin, D-Md., said: “Obviously, we want to make sure that military personnel, farm households and residents of rural areas are included…even if that means bringing the inflation rate down, something I imagine President Biden would quite enjoy.” A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.

☑ Crawford (R)

☑ Hill (R)

☑ Womack (R)

☐ Westerman (R)

Internet posting of inflation estimates. Adopted 386-31, an amendment requiring the Office of Management and Budget and Council of Economic Advisers inflation estimates ordered by HR 347 (above) to be posted on the OMB website. The original bill left out this basic transparen­cy step, an omission noticed by a congressma­n who had read the bill. Sponsor Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., said: “Without my amendment, the real-life consequenc­es of Joe Biden’s spending spree … will not be seen by those impacted most. This will provide transparen­cy for the administra­tion to answer to the American people. Economic strength and job growth result from policies that unshackle job creators, allow American ingenuity and provide certainty.” Another supporter, Jamie Raskin, D-Md., said: “I heard [Boebert] mention job creators. I assume she was responding to President Biden since 12 million new jobs have been created under President Biden, whereas millions of jobs were lost under the prior president, who may be a favorite of the gentlewoma­n’s.”

No member spoke against the amendment.

A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.

☑ Crawford (R)

☑ Hill (R)

☑ Womack (R)

☑ Westerman (R)

Marshaling House to fight inflation. Adopted 364-56, an amendment to HR 347 (above) stating “that combating inflation and bringing down the cost of living” is the job of the U.S. House as well as President Biden. Supporter Nicholas Langworthy, R-N.Y., said the amendment “states an obvious fact: It is the responsibi­lity of both the president and the House of Representa­tives to combat inflation. I have no quarrel with that. In fact, in advancing this bill, the House is taking one step toward fulfilling its responsibi­lity to combat inflation.” Another supporter, Jamie Raskin, D-Md., said that under the Constituti­on, “It is Congress that is supposed to be laying and collecting taxes … and dealing with the debt of the country. It is Congress that regulates commerce among the states and with foreign countries. So the failure to come forward with real productive legislatio­n on inflation is also a surrender to the executive branch, and we don’t need to do that.”

No member spoke against the amendment.

A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.

☑ Crawford (R)

☑ Hill (R)

☑ Womack (R)

☑ Westerman (R)

Setting target numbers for inflation reports. Rejected 232-187, an amendment to HR 347 (above) that sought to limit the scope of the bill to executive orders estimated to increase or decrease the Consumer Price Index’s yearly rate of inflation by at least one percentage point. The amendment sought to replace language that applied the bill more broadly to presidenti­al orders having “a significan­t impact” on inflation. Sponsor Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, said the specificit­y in her amendment was needed because “we cannot run the government by ambiguity, confusion, lack of clarity, and just throwing language down on the floor and expecting all the pieces of government to work together.” Nicholas Langworthy, R-N.Y., said: “Few individual executive orders, even ones that stoke inflation significan­tly, would on their own raise inflation by one full percentage point or more. What the amendment really is trying to do is gut the bill.”

A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.

☒ Crawford (R)

☒ Hill (R)

☒ Womack (R)

☒ Westerman (R)

SENATE

Killing Biden rule for retirement plans. Joined, 50-46 against, the House (above) in rolling back a new Department of Labor rule giving managers of retirement funds specific authority to consider a company’s environmen­tal, social and governance practices when deciding where to invest workers’ pension funds. The rule enshrines in regulation­s what had been only general department­al guidance allowing fiduciarie­s to consider all relevant economic factors when choosing investment­s. The Trump administra­tion issued a rule making it difficult for managers to consider ESG factors such as clean-energy practices in their investment decisions, and the Biden administra­tion is attempting to reverse that action. With this vote, the Senate sent to President Biden a GOP-sponsored resolution (HJ Res 30) that would kill the new rule. Supporter Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said the rule is part of an “unrelentin­g campaign to weaken our energy security, our national security and our economic security to advance, truly, their environmen­tal and social agenda. The ESG rule…is just another example of how our administra­tion prioritize­s a liberal policy agenda over protecting and growing…the retirement accounts of 150 million Americans that will be in jeopardy.” Opponent Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, called the GOP-drafted resolution “only the latest step in a campaign to prevent American financial institutio­ns from making money from the clean energy revolution, and it should offend anyone who supports free markets….They are just losing. People don’t want to invest in fossil fuel anymore, and so they are asking the Congress to intervene on their behalf.”

A yes vote was to nullify the Biden administra­tion rule.

☑ John Boozman (R)

☑ Tom Cotton (R)

VoteFacts.com News Reports is a nonpartisa­n, fact-based news service whose mission is to help civically engaged individual­s and organizati­ons track major actions in the U.S. House and Senate. Readers can visit www.VoteFacts.com for additional informatio­n on top issues and individual voting records in the current 118th Congress and recent 117th Congress.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States