HOW THEY VOTED

WASHINGTON — How the Texas congressional delegation voted on major issues last week:

Senate

1. Six-Year Transporta

tion Bill: Voted, 62-36, to start debate on a bill (HR 22) that would authorize $317 billion over six years for highway and masstransit construction projects. Because the Highway Trust Fund is projected to raise only $240 billion over the next six years to finance these projects, the bill faces a shortfall of $77 billion that would be funded by revenue increases or spending cuts yet to be fully determined. If the bill clears the Senate, it would have to be reconciled with a Housepassed measure to fund transportation programs only through Dec. 18. A yes vote was to advance the transportation bill.

House

1. Sanctuary Cities, Immigration Enforce

ment: Passed, 241-179, a bill to deny certain lawenforcement grants to so-called “sanctuary cities” that decline to act as an arm of federal immigration enforcement. The GOPdrafted bill (HR 3009) is a response to a recent murder in San Francisco, a sanctuary city, in which a a man in the country illegally and with felony convictions allegedly gunned down Kathryn Steinle after city authorities released him from custody. Officials in sanctuary cities say that to assist with federal immigration enforcement would undercut community-policing efforts that depend on rapport with immigrant populations. Backers of the bill said cities are required by law to comply with federal requests that they detain illegal immigrants. A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate.

2. Crime Rates, Sanc

tuary Cities: Defeated, 181-239, a bid by Democrats to block any funding cuts under HR 3009 (above) that would reduce a city’s deployment of police on the beat or raise its crime rate with respect to domestic violence, sex crimes or crimes against children. A yes vote was to adopt the motion, which, had it prevailed, would have immediately amended the bill.

3. Coal-Ash Regula

tion: Passed, 258-166, a GOP-drafted bill (HR 1734) that would give states rather than the Environmental Protection Agency primary authority to regulate the coal ash discharged as waste by the nation’s 500-plus coal-fired power plants. The bill would put states in charge of permitting and enforcement under a new EPA rule for regulating coal ash impounded in ponds or landfills near these plants. The federal rule takes effect Oct. 19. Addressing factors such as the structural integrity and location of storage sites, it is designed to protect drinking water, groundwater and air quality from ash containing elements such as arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead and selenium. The EPA began its rule-making process in response to a December 2008 spill at a Tennessee Valley Authority facility at Kingston, Tenn., which spread coal-ash sludge over 300 acres and into the Emory and Clinch rivers. A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate.

4. Drinking Water From

Nearby Wells: Refused, 192-231, to require operators of coal-ash impoundment sites to provide notification and alternative sources of safe drinking water to properties within one-half mile whose wells show signs of coal-ash contamination. The Democratic-sponsored amendment was offered to HR 1734 (above). A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.

5. Voluntary Labeling

of GMOFoods: Passed, 275-150, a bill (HR 1599) that would establish a system of voluntary, stateadministered labeling requirements for foods that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In addition, the bill pre-empts any existing or future state or local laws that establish mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods. At present, there are no federal requirements for GMO labeling. A yes vote favored a voluntary state-by-state approach to labeling GMO foods.

6. Mandatory GMOLa

beling: Defeated,123-303, an amendment to HR 1599 (above) that sought to require mandatory, federally administered labeling of foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This would replace the underlying bill’s voluntary statelevel approach. A yes vote was to establish federally mandated labeling of foods containing GMOs.

7.GMOFoods La

beled as ‘Natural’: Refused,163-262, to prohibit food labeled as “natural” from containing generically modified ingredients. The vote affirmed wording in HR 1599 (above) that allows Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture definitions of “natural” to include GMO foods. A yes vote was to prohibit foods containing GMOs from being labeled as “natural.”