UTU NEWS
| Volume 26 | March, 1994 | Number 3 |
UTU NEWS
ONLINE EDITION
MARCH 1994
PROGRESS THROUGH UNITY
A Service of the United Transportation Union
Public Relations Department
Editorial Offices:
UTU News
14600 Detroit Ave.
Cleveland, OH 44107-4250
The following may be re-posted in electronic form to any network or computer system worldwide, provided no alteration of text occurs other than for formatting purposes. TABLE OF CONTENTS --The UTU News On-Line Edition takes advantage of the search- and-find features in your editor or word processor. For example, to read the first of this month's "FEATURES," have your editor or word processor search for the text "##F". IN THIS EDITION --UTU prevails in Wisconsin Central battles.....##A --Informal UTU panel explores bargaining options....##B --UTU confronts Burlington Northern ring ban....##C ON THE MOVE --West Virginia lawmakers back RRB status quo.......##D --UTU officers confer with DOT's Pena...........##E FEATURES --Labor to challenge random alcohol testing.........##F --Alabama bridge safety measure advances.......##G --Amtrak high-speed plan on track...................##H A MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT DuBOSE --Unity paves the path to negotiations.........##I BRIEFLY --Unions, carriers at odds with snowmobilers........##J --Quake spawns landfill........................##K --Burlington Northern tests trough train............##L --Union Pacific yard sets record.........##M --MetroNorth beats on-time goal.....................##N NOTICES --Tri-State Boosters slate convention..........##O --UTU endorses Illinois candidates..................##P --UTUIA offers Ultimate Term...................##Q SENATE REPORT CARD --UTU rates Senators' voting records................##R HOUSE REPORT CARD --UTU rates Representatives' voting records....##S ==================================================== ==================================================== IN THIS EDITION --UTU prevails in Wisconsin Central battles.....##A The UTU has received two long-awaited decisions concerning the Fox Valley & Western's (FV&W) acquisition of two carriers, both upholding and vindicating the UTU's position. In the first decision, a federal appeals court has ruled that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) was correct in requiring FV&W's purchase of the Green Bay & Western (GB&W) and Fox River Valley (FRV) railroads to fall under Section 11343 of the Interstate Commerce Act, which mandates labor protection. The FV&W, a Wisconsin Central subsidiary, had applied to the ICC for authority to acquire the GB&W and FRV under Section 10901 of the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA), which does not provide for labor protections. UTU and others fought the move, arguing that the acquisition had to be accomplished under 11343 and that labor protections must be imposed for employees of both carriers. After a long battle, the ICC upheld the UTU's position. The FV&W appealed, and a federal appeals court now has sided with the UTU in all aspects. In the other decision, the National Mediation Board (NMB) has ruled that FV&W is, for representational purposes, a single transportation system. The ruling means that union representation will remain in effect on the GB&W and FRV until the NMB conducts an investigation of the proper crafts and classes on the FV&W. GB&W conductors and trainmen have long been represented by the UTU. The UTU won certification on the FRV for every craft except maintenance of way last year. "We think NMB has taken the correct first step in resolving this issue," UTU International President G. Thomas DuBose said. "But, we've advised the board that it needs to resolve representational issues. It needs to determine whether new representation elections are necessary." Unresolved, however, is whether GB&W contracts carry forward to the FV&W. "We think that the contracts on the GB&W continue in existence," DuBose said. He left open the possibility that the UTU would negotiate new contracts rather than seek to apply the existing GB&W agreements to all FV&W employees. The NMB conducted a craft and class investigation on the carriers last month to help resolve the disputes over representation. That resolution should occur by the end of this month. --Informal UTU panel explores bargaining options....##B UTU International President G. Thomas DuBose has appointed a committee to meet with carrier representatives on an informal basis to explore possible options for future bargaining. "We want to avoid the long, drawn-out negotiating process that has failed us in the past," DuBose said. "We want to avoid what happened in the last round of negotiations. We are seeking a better alternative." Appointed to the committee were Assistant President Lloyd Swert (chairperson) and Vice Presidents Pete Patsouras, Paul Thompson, Warner Biedenharn and Robert Snyder. DuBose stressed that the talks with representatives of the National Carriers' Conference Committee, the bargaining arm of the National Railway Labor Conference, were, at this stage, exploratory and informal, but still offered a better route to an early and more equitable settlement. --UTU confronts Burlington Northern ring ban....##C The UTU is fighting Burlington Northern efforts to ban the wearing of rings by train crew members. BN has for the past year been phasing in a prohibition against rings for shop and maintenance of way workers, but on February 1 extended the ban to operating personnel, including engineers, conductors, switchmen and others. UTU International President G. Thomas DuBose said the ring ban was the latest in a series of attempts by BN to force a confrontation with the union. "Wedding rings in particular have an emotional and religious significance to our members," DuBose said. "They have yet to sit down and talk to us and show us that wedding rings have caused X number of accidents." "It (the ring ban) has our members pretty upset," said BN General Chairperson Carl Vahldick, "but it's not resolved yet. They haven't shown us any real safety reasons for not wearing rings. But they haven't sent anyone home for wearing a ring and they haven't cut anybody's ring off like they said they would." DuBose and Vahldick agreed that the ring ban was the latest in a series of recent disagreements the UTU has had with the carrier. In December BN quickly retreated from a plan to make employees responsible for their portable radios. BN tried to give each employee a radio and battery charger to take care of, but the union charged that that was an effort to enter into a contractual relationship with individual employees in violation of the Railway Labor Act. Another area of dispute is BN's attempt to use union personnel in the reenactment of accidents. "We are urging our members not to participate in these reenactments," Vahldick said. He said such reenactments can lead to disciplinary actions or lessen an employee's claims under the Federal Employers' Liability Act. Vahldick also urged BN members not to participate in quality committees. "We've asked our members not to participate in those efforts. They start out with good goals in mind, but they step into areas covered by our agreements." ON THE MOVE --West Virginia lawmakers back RRB status quo.......##D At the urging of UTU State Legislative Director George Williamson, and sponsored by State Senator Eugene Claypole, the West Virginia legislature has passed a resolution urging Congress to reject the proposal to transfer the functions of the Railroad Retirement Board to the Social Security Administration. The West Virginia lawmakers were the first in the nation to vote such a resolution. A similar measure was recently passed in Alabama and is pending in other states. --UTU officers confer with DOT's Pena...........##E Department of Transportation Administrator Federico F. Pena met with a group of UTU officers at a recent UTU Association of State Legislative Directors meeting in Washington, D.C. The group discussed with Pena the UTU's position on a variety of issues, including rail and highway safety, grade crossing safety and Amtrak and mass transit funding. At the meeting were National Legislative Director James Brunkenhoefer, New York State Legislative Director Sam Nasca, Michigan State Legislative Director David Brickey, Colorado State Legislative Director Jack Shaver, and North Carolina State Legislative Director James Stem. FEATURES --Labor to challenge random alcohol testing.........##F The Department of Transportation has issued new regulations requiring random tests for alcohol use for almost seven-and- a-half million transportation workers, rules that are expected to be challenged in court. The expanded testing program, to take effect next January for companies of 50 or more employees, will affect more than six million truck, interstate bus and school bus drivers, 280,000 railroad and mass transit employees, 340,000 airline workers and 120,000 pipeline workers. It is estimated that the expanded testing regulations will cost the transportation industry $200 million a year to enforce. Most workers whose breath shows a blood alcohol content of 0.04% or more will be immediately removed from the job. Workers found to have a level of 0.02% to 0.04% would be removed from the job for at least eight hours, or until testing below 0.02%. Some railroad workers, however, could face tougher carrier-imposed standards, because the rules permit individual employers to impose stricter sanctions. "An employee could fall under the (federal) threshold and still be fired," complained Ed Wytkind of the AFL-CIO's Transportation Trades Department. The regulations also bar alcohol use by workers within four hours of starting work, or eight hours in the case of airline workers, and deny employees the right to mark off duty without recourse if he or she feels impaired or unable to perform. Failure rates will be compiled by industry. Those industries with 1% or more positives will be required to test half their employees for alcohol use, rather than the 25% a year initially called for. Industries which test below .5% for two consecutive years will be allowed to lower the testing rate to 10% of employees. Random drug-testing rates can also be brought down, from the current 50% to 25%, if an industry can reduce its positive rate to below 1% for two straight years. That is good news for rail workers, who have tested below 1% for the last two years, because results for the past two years would apply. UTU and other labor groups called the new regulations overly intrusive, unconstitutional and costly. Labor also assailed the regulations for not making rehabilitation and treatment a mandatory part of the program, and not offering enough protection against erroneous test results. Labor also was disappointed that supervisory personnel are not covered by the new rules, and may challenge the regulations in an effort to bring supervisors under the regulations. Labor also was troubled because the rules only allow 72 hours within which to request that a second sample be tested. Another controversial section says that, in the event approved breath-testing devices are not "readily available," workers must submit to blood tests following an accident or if a trained observer suspects that an employee has been consuming alcohol. --Alabama bridge safety measure advances.......##G The UTU is spearheading efforts in Alabama to prevent a recurrence of the kind of wreck last year at Saraland, Ala., that claimed 47 lives. Legislation written by State Legislative Director Jim Elrod to require warning devices on rail bridges which would detect a shift in the bridges or misalignment of the track and alert crews is working its way through both houses of the state legislature. Two carriers, the CSX and Norfolk Southern, are waging well-financed campaigns against the measure, and CSX even has threatened to move a barge transfer operation from Alabama to Louisiana if the measure becomes law. In testimony, the carriers claimed that there is no technology available to detect structure displacement, that costs would be too high, and that the federal government, not individual states, is responsible for rail safety, but the UTU shot down each argument. "I have recently found out that the Norfolk Southern has these devices in place at several locations," Elrod said. "Each device would cost approximately $10,000 to install and maintain, so the total cost for the 56 bridges listed in the bills would only be $560,000 distributed amongst five different railroads whose combined net profits for 1993 exceeded $915 million." The UTU also showed that states may pass rail safety regulations if they are stronger than the federal regulations and address local safety hazards. "When the railroads will not take the measures to correct potential unsafe conditions that are a daily part of the jobs our members face as well as the citizens of Alabama and the passengers traveling through our state, we have no other choice but to come to our elected legislators and request their help to correct these unsafe conditions that could have devastating effects on our natural environment and the lives of the citizens of Alabama," Elrod said. "I have nothing but praise for Alabama State Legislative Director Elrod and others for their initiative and efforts to make bridges safe for employees and the general public," UTU International President G. Thomas DuBose said. --Amtrak high-speed plan on track...................##H Amtrak has completed several phases of a proposed high-speed rail route between New Haven and Boston, but will have to wait until spring to know if the project is formally approved. The passenger carrier says it has completed several aspects of the project, including portions of a new signal and traffic control system, high-speed crossovers and property acquisition work, but must wait until May for approval of the project that will cut travel times between Boston and New York to under three hours. Some residents along the line have expressed concerns over noise and increased rail traffic, and the government needs to address those concerns before approval can be given. A MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT DuBOSE --Unity paves the path to negotiations.........##I In an effort to keep all UTU members better informed about the numerous issues facing our union, I will periodically run in the UTU News timely information, editorial opinion or correspondence that is of interest to all members. Below is one such letter. G. Thomas DuBose International President ******************************************************* February 7, 1994 Re: National Negotiations? Dear Sir and Brother: This in reference to the above item and reported meeting between yourself, L. Swert, P.T. Thompson, Bob Snyder and others and railroad representatives. Such meeting is reported to involve discussions of wages and rules. This is the second such report made to the undersigned, one from each side of the table. If such meetings are being held, I would inquire as to your authority to speak of such matters in behalf of any General Chairperson or Committee. I know personally, no such authority emanated from this office. Request your earliest response in addressing the alleged action referenced above. I feel it only fair to bring this matter directly to you as an initial step, rather than deal with rumor and innuendo. Awaiting your response, I am, Fraternally yours, J.F. Fitzgerald General Chairman Burlington Northern *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** February 14, 1994 Dear Sir and Brother: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated February 7, 1994, regarding the current discussions between representatives of the National Carriers' Conference Committee (NCCC) and the United Transportation Union. Informal talks are indeed underway. Assistant President L. W. Swert, Vice Presidents P.L. Patsouras, P.C. Thompson, W.E. Biedenharn, Jr. and R.D. Snyder are actively participating in the discussions, although the UTU and the carriers who are part of the national movement are barred from serving formal Section 6 notices before November 1, 1994. It is in the best interest of the membership to, among other things, determine what the carriers have in mind for the next round of negotiations. To clarify any misunderstanding created by erroneous misinformation that is being circulated, these are not formal negotiations, they are informal and exploratory. We have to consider the likelihood of consummating an early National Agreement and avoid long protracted negotiations, mediation, Presidential Emergency Boards, and Congressional intervention. If you will recall, the subject of preliminary discussions with the NCCC was addressed by the undersigned and Assistant President Swert during the five (5) Regional Meetings and Seminars held last year. Although you were in attendance at the Kansas City meeting as well as the Regional Meeting in Portland, Oregon, it is quite obvious you did not participate in that part of the program where the above information was shared with everyone. Had you availed yourself of the opportunity to hear my address as well as listen to the remarks of Assistant President Swert, you would have been fully aware of our intention to meet with the carriers in early 1994, in an effort to reach a settlement on wages and rules prior to the expiration of the existing moratorium. Heretofore national movements have been protracted, and frustrating. We cannot accept the process of formalizing a National Agreement to take four or five years. My administration will not tolerate indecision when the interest of the membership is on the line. I would remind you of the history of the last several Agreements. We have served Section 6 notices and progressed formal negotiations which led to PEB's and ultimately to mandated Agreements. These Agreements have cost our membership both jobs, rules and compensation. To repeat our mistakes of the past, can only result in the same failures in the future. It is for this reason that I chose to use my administration to change the direction of our organization and try something new in hope of improving the benefits of our membership. In 1987, the delegates to the convention saw fit to pass an amendment for membership ratification of our National Agreements. To date, that amendment has meant nothing to our membership because a third party, bias to the carriers' desires, has seen fit to force adverse Agreements upon our membership. I favored membership ratification in 1987, and I promised our membership that my administration would do everything possible, to correct the ills of the past. Under the UTU Constitution, as President, I have been granted the authority to appoint a committee to discuss on an informal basis, anything that is of benefit to our membership. Failure on my part to capitalize on something that could benefit all of our membership, would be nothing less than a dereliction of my responsibilities as President of the UTU. We are committed to nothing in these discussions, other than to try to improve the wages and benefits of our members. If we are successful in this endeavor, for the first time in the history of our union, membership ratification will be the determining factor as to whether or not our judgment was correct. If you or others have a better suggestion to avoid the mistakes of the past, please advise. If not, please join with me in a unified effort in the best interest of our membership. Fraternally yours, G. Thomas DuBose International President ******************************************************* BRIEFLY --Unions, carriers at odds with snowmobilers........##J Unions and carriers in Wisconsin are fighting a new law that gives snowmobile organizations the right to seek permits to build snowmobile crossings over railroad tracks once they have obtained liability insurance. Labor argues that snowmobiles should cross at public crossings. --Quake spawns landfill........................##K As much as 1.6 billion pounds of debris from the Los Angeles earthquake appears headed for a giant, state-of-the- art landfill in central Utah by rail. Several transport bids are under consideration. --Burlington Northern tests trough train............##L Burlington Northern plans to test a full-size trough train that the carrier claims will carry up to 40% more coal than a gondola train of the same length. The trough train will consist of 22 articulated aluminum cars, each 278 feet long, or about the length of a 115-car gondola car train. BN says shorter prototypes already have been run. --Union Pacific yard sets record.........##M Union Pacific's 2,850-acre Bailey Yard in Omaha, Neb., will be recognized as the world's largest in the 1995 edition of the "Guinness Book of World Records." --MetroNorth beats on-time goal.....................##N The Metro-North commuter railroad ran its trains at near record rates for on-time performance last year, according to reports. For all of 1993, the on-time average was 96.1%. The rate surpassed the 95% goal the railroad set for itself but was slightly less than the record-setting 96.4% achieved in 1992. NOTICES --Tri-State Boosters slate convention..........##O The Tri-State Booster Association will be holding its 66th annual convention June 16-18, 1994, at the Omni International Hotel, 777 Waterside Dr., Norfolk, VA 23510. Rooms are $69 plus tax for a single or double. To make reservations, call 804-622-6664 or 800-843-6664. --UTU endorses Illinois candidates..................##P UTU Illinois State Legislative Director Patrick W. Simmons recommends that UTU members living in that state vote for the following Congressional candidates in the primary election scheduled for March 15, 1994 (where no district is listed there is no recommendation): District Recommendation 1 Bobby Rush (D)* 2 Mel Reynolds (D)* 3 William O. Lipinski (D)* 4 Luis V. Gutierrez (D)* 5 Dan Rostenkowski (D)* 6 Tom Berry (D) (Member, L-528) 6 Henry Hyde (R)* 7 Cardiss Collins (D)* 9 Sidney R. Yates (D)* 11 Frank Giglio (D) 12 Jerry F. Costello (D) 17 Lane Evans (D)* 18 Thomas J. Homer (R) 19 Glenn Poshard (D)* 20 Richard J. Durbin (D)* * = incumbent NOTE: UTU state legislative directors are urged to send UTU News their recommendations for upcoming elections in their states. Deadlines are approximately 12 days prior to the end of the month. --UTUIA offers Ultimate Term...................##Q UTUIA is proud to announce a new insurance concept. Now you don't have to settle for a generic, one-size-fits-all plan. With UTUIA's ULTIMATE TERM life insurance, you can custom design a plan that's tailored to your individual needs. This kind of flexibility is possible with ULTIMATE TERM's unique multiple-choice format. You choose the type of coverage desiredÐlevel, increasing, decreasing; the length of coverage, any changes in coverage, and the premium schedule. It's a perfect fit every time. Contact your UTUIA Field Supervisor for details, or write to: UTUIA Promotion Dept., 14600 Detroit Ave., Cleveland, OH 44107-4250. SENATE REPORT CARD --UTU rates Senators' voting records................##R The following is the voting record of members of the Senate on a number of issues important to the UTU. This record will help you determine whether your legislator is a friend of the UTU and all working men and women of this country. This knowledge and your TPEL donations help elect capable people who are sympathetic to the needs of rail, transit and bus employees. THE ISSUES: 1)Family and Medical Leave/Passage - H.R. 1. Requires employers of more than 50 employees to provide 12 weeks of unpaid leave for an illness or to care for a new child or sick family member. 2)National Motor Voter Registration/Cloture - S. 460. This bill was similar to H.R. 2 which passed the House. The vote was to invoke cloture (limit debate) which requires 60 votes. This motion failed by one vote on March 16, 1993. However, after agreement was reached with the minority on certain amendments, the legislation was called back to the floor the following day and passed. 3)Unemployment Benefits Extension/Passage - H.R. 920. Passed on March 3, 1993, by a vote of 66-33. This bill provided $5.7 billion to allow for the processing of claims from March 6 through October 2, 1993, for federal extended emergency unemployment benefits. RUIA benefits for unemployed rail workers were included in the legislation. 4Fiscal 1993 Supplemental Appropriations/Amtrak - H.R. 1335. This vote was on a motion by Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W. Va.) to table (kill) the Danforth (R-Mo.) amendment to eliminate $188 million in the bill for Amtrak. This amendment was, of course, opposed by UTU and it was defeated on March 31 on a vote of 61-38. 5)Fiscal 1994 Transportation Appropriation/Interstate Commerce Commission - H.R. 2750. Sen. Danforth (R-Mo.) offered an amendment to this bill to eliminate funding for the ICC. In effect, this was an attempt to eliminate the ICC through the appropriation process. UTU opposed this amendment as this agency still performs an important function in the rail and trucking industries. A motion by Sen. Exon (D-Neb.) to table the Danforth amendment was agreed to by a vote of 52-39 on October 4, 1993. 6)Unemployment Benefit Extension/Conference Report - H.R. 3167. The Conference Report was passed on November 20, 1993. Adoption of the Conference Report would provide $1 billion for extended unemployment benefits for workers who have exhausted their 26 weeks of unemployment benefits for an additional seven or 13 weeks of compensation depending on the unemployment rates in each state. 7)NAFTA Implementation/Passage - H.R. 3450. The bill was passed on November 20, 1993, by a vote of 61-38. The North American Free Trade Agreement and the necessary changes to U.S. statutory law to implement it was passed over UTUÕs and all AFL-CIO affiliated unionsÕ objections. We believe this agreement will cost many thousands of good-paying U.S. jobs. SENATORS Key to Symbols
R--Voted right or was paired right
W--Voted wrong or was paired wrong
A--Absent or not paired
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
ALABAMA
Heflin (D) W R R W A R R 4 2 53 33
Shelby (D) R R R W A R R 5 1 51 27
ALASKA
Murkowski (R) R W W W W R W 2 5 24 50
Stevens (R) R W R W W R R 4 3 88 49
ARIZONA
DeConcini (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 70 24
McCain (R) R W W W W R W 2 5 21 45
ARKANSAS
Bumpers (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 79 24
Pryor (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 59 22
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
CALIFORNIA
Boxer (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 7 0
Feinstein (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 7 0
COLORADO
Campbell (D) R R R R W R R 6 1 6 1
Brown (R) W W W W W W W 0 7 3 22
CONNECTICUT
Dodd (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 70 8
Lieberman (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 28 5
DELAWARE
Biden (D) R R R R A R W 5 1 87 25
Roth (R) R W W R W R W 3 4 43 84
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
FLORIDA
Graham (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 32 11
Mack (R) W W W W W W W 0 7 4 29
GEORGIA
Nunn (D) R R R R A R W 5 1 111 73
Coverdell (R) W W W W W W W 0 7 0 7
HAWAII
Akaka (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 78 16
Inouye (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 159 15
IDAHO
Craig (R) W W W W W W R 1 7 3 23
Kempthorne (R) W W W W W W R 1 7 1 7
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
ILLINOIS
M-Braun (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 6 1
Simon (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 45 4
INDIANA
Coats (R) R W W R W R W 3 4 19 56
Lugar (R) W W W R R W W 2 5 25 71
IOWA
Harkin (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 47 6
Grassley (R) W W W W W R W 1 6 24 53
KANSAS
Dole (R) W W W W W W W 0 7 35 98
Kassebaum (R) W W W R W R W 2 5 29 57
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
KENTUCKY
Ford (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 94 15
McConnell (R) W W W W A R W 1 5 13 41
LOUISIANA
Breaux (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 81 40
Johnston (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 78 34
MAINE
Mitchell (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 64 18
Cohen (R) R W W R R R R 5 2 41 44
MARYLAND
Mikulski (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 89 12
Sarbanes (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 89 9
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
MASSACHUSETTS
Kennedy (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 159 11
Kerry (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 48 6
MICHIGAN
Levin (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 78 10
Reigle (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 88 9
MINNESOTA
Wellstone (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 24 1
Durenberger (R) R W R W A R W 3 3 53 33
MISSISSIPPI
Cochran (R) W W W W W W W 0 7 29 55
Lott (R) W W W W W W W 0 7 60 123
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
MISSOURI
Bond (R) R W W A A R W 2 3 11 28
Danforth (R) R W W W W W W 1 6 41 56
MONTANA
Baucus (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 63 24
Burns (R) R W W W W R R 3 4 4 28
NEBRASKA
Exon (D) R R R R R W R 6 1 65 21
Kerrey (D) R R R R R W W 5 2 26 4
NEVADA
Bryan (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 28 5
Reid (D) R R R R W R R 6 1 60 6
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Gregg (R) W W R W W W W 1 6 1 6
Smith (R) W W W W W W R 1 6 2 23
NEW JERSEY
Bradley (D) R R R R A R W 5 1 75 10
Lautenberg (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 61 4
NEW MEXICO
Bingaman (D) R R A R W R W 4 2 59 6
Domenici (R) W W R W W R W 2 5 41 68
NEW YORK
Moynihan (D) R R R R W R R 6 1 85 9
DÕAmato (R) R W R W W R R 4 3 48 29
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
NORTH CAROLINA
Faircloth (R) W W W W W W R 1 6 1 6
Helms (R) W W W W W W R 1 6 10 106
NORTH DAKOTA
Conrad (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 39 4
Dorgan (D) R R R R R A A 5 0 5 0
OHIO
Glenn (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 91 15
Metzenbaum (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 84 12
OKLAHOMA
Boren (D) R R R W R R W 5 2 52 34
Nickles (R) W W W W W W W 0 7 11 66
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
OREGON
Hatfield (R) R R R W R R W 5 2 91 47
Packwood (R) R W W W R R W 3 4 78 60
PENNSYLVANIA
Wofford (D) R R R R A R R 6 0 23 7
Specter (R) R W R R R R W 5 2 54 21
RHODE ISLAND
Pell (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 175 18
Chafee (R) R W R R W R W 4 3 52 57
SOUTH CAROLINA
Hollings (D) W R R R R R R 6 1 62 128
Thurmond (R) A W W W W R R 2 4 33 162
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
SOUTH DAKOTA
Daschle (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 65 20
Pressler (R) W W W W R W W 1 6 27 50
TENNESSEE
Mathews (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 6 1
Sasser (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 84 15
TEXAS
Bailey (R) W R W 1 2 1 2
Gramm (R) W W W W W W W 0 7 0 54
UTAH
Bennett (R) W W W W W R W 1 6 1 6
Hatch (R) W W W W W R W 1 6 26 70
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
VERMONT
Leahy (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 97 13
Jeffords (R) R R R W W R W 4 3 72 37
VIRGINIA
Robb (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 24 9
Warner (R) W W W W W R W 1 6 28 60
WASHINGTON
Murray (D) R R R R R R W 6 1 6 1
Gorton (R) W W R W R R W 3 4 7 26
WEST VIRGINIA
Byrd (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 162 35
Rockefeller (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 49 6
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 R W R W
WISCONSIN
Feingold (D) R R R R W R R 6 1 6 1
Kohl (D) R R R R R R R 7 0 29 4
WYOMING
Simpson (R) W W W W W R W 1 6 20 66
Wallop (R) A W W W W W W 0 6 14 78
HOUSE REPORT CARD --UTU rates Representatives' voting records....##S The following is the voting record of members of the House of Representatives on a number of issues important to the UTU. This record will help you determine whether your legislator is a friend of the UTU and all working men and women of this country. This knowledge and your TPEL donations help elect capable people who are sympathetic to the needs of rail, transit and bus employees. THE ISSUES: 1)Family and Medical Leave/Passage - H.R. 1. This vote was on final passage of the bill to require employers of more than 50 employees to provide 12 weeks of unpaid leave for an illness or to care for a new child or sick family member. This UTU-supported legislation passed 265-163 on February 3, 1993, and was signed into law by President Clinton. 2)National Motor-Voter Registration/Passage - H.R. 2. The passage of this bill now requires states to allow citizens to register to vote while applying for or renewing a driverÕs license or other public certificate. This UTU-supported legislation passed 259-160 on February 4, 1993, and was signed by President Clinton. 3)Unemployment Benefits Extension/Passage - H.R. 920. This UTU-supported bill provided $5.7 billion to allow for the processing of claims from March 6 through October 2, 1993, for federal extended emergency unemployment benefits. RUIA benefits for unemployed rail workers were included in the legislation. Final passage occurred on February 24, 1993, by a vote of 254-161. 4)Fiscal 1993 Supplemental Appropriations/Passage - H.R. 1335. This bill would provide $16.3 billion in new budget authority and approve $3.4 billion in trust fund spending to implement the Clinton AdministrationÕs stimulus package to help the economy recover. Included in the transportation portion of this UTU-supported legislation was $188 million for Amtrak and $750 million for mass transit. On March 19, 1993, the House voted 235-190 for passage. 5)Fiscal 1994 Transportation Appropriations/Amtrak - H.R. 2750. Cong. Joel Hefley (R-Colo.) offered the first of two amendments cutting funding for Amtrak. This amendment would have cut the carrierÕs operating assistance by $331 million, effectively shutting Amtrak down with the possible exception of the Northeast Corridor. This amendment was rejected by a 337-84 vote on September 23, 1993. 6)Fiscal 1994 Transportation Appropriation/Amtrak - H.R. 2750. This was the second amendment offered by Cong. Hefley which would have cut $33.1 million from AmtrakÕs operating assistance. While this amendment was not nearly so severe as his first amendment, it still would have critically damaged AmtrakÕs ability to operate should it have passed. This amendment failed on a 271-153 vote on September 23, 1993. 7)NAFTA Implementation/Passage - H.R. 3450. The North American Free Trade Agreement and the necessary changes to U.S. statutory law to implement it was passed over UTUÕs and all AFL-CIO affiliated unionsÕ objections. We believe this agreement will cost many thousands of good-paying U.S. jobs. The bill passed by a vote of 234-200 on November 17, 1993. 8)Unemployment Benefit Extension/Conference Report - H.R. 3167. Adoption of this conference report will provide $1 billion for extended unemployment benefits for workers who have exhausted their 26 weeks of unemployment benefits for an additional seven or 13 weeks of compensation depending on the unemployment rates in each state. The report was adopted on November 23, 1993, by a 320-105 vote. REPRESENTATIVES Key to Symbols
R--Voted right or was paired right
W--Voted wrong or was paired wrong
A--Absent or not paired
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
ALABAMA
1 Callahan (R) W W W W R R W W 2 6 8 42
2 Everett (R) W W R W R R R R 5 3 5 3
3 Browder (D) W W R R R R R R 6 2 20 10
4 Bevill (D) R W R R R R R R 7 1 111 44
5 Cramer (D) R W R R W W R W 4 4 14 9
6 Bachus (R) W W W W R R W W 2 6 2 6
7 Hilliard (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
ALASKA 1 Young (R) R W R W W W R W 3 5 56 56 ARIZONA 1 Coopersmith(D) R R R W R R W R 6 2 6 2 2 Pastor (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 17 1 3 Stump (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 17 85 4 Kyl (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 42 5 Kolbe (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 8 42 6 English (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1 ARKANSAS 1 Lambert (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1 2 Thornton (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 20 2 3 Hutchison (R) W W W W A W W W 0 7 0 7 4 Dickey (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 1 7 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
CALIFORNIA
1 Hamburg (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
2 Herger (R) W W W W A W W R 1 6 5 36
3 Fazio (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 90 8
4 Dolittle (R) W W W W W W R R 2 6 2 6
5 Matsui (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 75 10
6 Woolsey (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
7 Miller (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 95 18
8 Pelosi (D) R R R R A R W R 6 1 37 2
9 Dellums (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 118 17
10 Baker (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 1 7
11 Pombo (R) W W W W W W R R 2 6 2 6
12 Lantos (D) R R A R R R R R 7 0 68 3
13 Stark (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 105 15
14 Eshoo (D) R R R R R R W R 1 7 1 7
15 Mineta (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 104 13
16 Edwards (D) R R R R A A R R 6 0 175 11
17 Farr (D) R R W R 3 1 3 1
18 Condit (D) R W R W R W R R 5 3 19 9
19 Lehman (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 58 4
20 Dooley (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 19 4
21 Thomas (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 14 48
22 Huffington (R) R W W W W W W R 2 6 2 6
23 Gallegly (R) W W W W W W R R 2 6 6 36
24 Beilenson (D) R W R R R R W R 6 2 73 27
25 McKeon (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 1 7
26 Berman (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 57 6
27 Moorhead (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 27 99
28 Dreier (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 5 68
29 Waxman (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 93 13
30 Becerra (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
31 Martinez (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 62 2
32 Dixon (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 77 5
33 Roybl-Alard(D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
34 Torres (D) R R R R R R W A 6 1 62 2
35 Waters (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 22 0
36 Harman (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
37 Tucker (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
38 Horn (R) R W R W R R W R 5 3 5 3
39 Royce (R) W W W W W W R W 1 7 1 7
40 Lewis (R) W W W W R R W W 2 6 27 55
41 Kim (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 1 7
42 Brown (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 112 12
43 Calvet (R) W W W W R W W R 2 6 2 6
44 McCandless (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 8 56
45 Rohrabacher(R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 1 31
46 Dornan (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 3 48
47 Cox (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 32
48 Packard (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 8 56
49 Schenk (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
50 Filner (R) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
51 Cunningham (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 1 22
52 Hunter (R) W W W W W W R W 1 7 13 59
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
COLORADO
1 Schroeder (D) R R R R R W W R 6 2 85 38
2 Skaggs (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 34 8
3 McInnis (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8
4 Allard (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 22
5 Hefley (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 1 41
6 Schaefer (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 16 47
CONNECTICUT 1 Kennelly (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 70 1 2 Gejdenson (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 70 5 3 DeLauro (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 23 0 4 Shays (R) R R W W R W W W 3 5 20 18 5 Franks (R) W W W W R R W R 3 5 4 19 6 Johnson (R) R A W W R R W R 4 3 39 26 DELAWARE 1 Castle (R) R W A W R R W R 4 3 4 3 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
FLORIDA
1 Hutto (D) W W W W R R W R 3 5 41 44
2 Peterson (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 20 2
3 Brown (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
4 Fowler (R) W W W W R R W W 2 6 2 6
5 Thurman (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
6 Stearns (R) W W W W R W R W 2 6 6 26
7 Mica (R) W W W W R R R W 3 5 3 5
8 McCollum (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 14 60
9 Bilirakis (R) W R W W W W R W 2 6 19 45
10 Young (R) R W W W R W W W 2 6 55 83
11 Gibbons (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 131 55
12 Canady (R) W W W W R W R R 3 5 3 5
13 Miller (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8
14 Goss (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 2 30
15 Bacchus (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 19 4
16 Lewis (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 16 49
17 Meek (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
18 Ros-Lehtnen(R) R R R W W W R R 5 3 14 14
19 Johnston (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 28 3
20 Deutsch (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
21 Diaz-Balart(R) R R R W W W R R 5 3 5 3
22 Shaw (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 16 59
23 Hastings (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
GEORGIA
1 Kingston (R) W W W W W W R W 1 7 1 7
2 Bishop (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
3 Collins (R) W W R W R W R W 3 5 3 5
4 Linder (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8
5 Lewis (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 41 1
6 Gingrich (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 22 64
7 Darden (D) W R R R R R W R 6 2 41 19
8 Rowland (D) W W R W R R W W 3 5 41 24
9 Deal (D) W W W R R R W W 3 5 3 5
10 Johnson (D) W R W R R R W W 4 4 4 4
11 McKinney (D) R R R R A R R R 7 0 7 0
HAWAII 1 Abercromb (D) R R A R R R R R 7 0 21 0 2 Mink (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 23 0 IDAHO 1 LaRocco (D) W R R R R R R R 7 1 17 6 2 Crapo (R) W W W W W W R W 1 7 1 7 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
ILLINOIS
1 Rush (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
2 Reynolds (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
3 Lipinski (D) R W R R R R R R 7 1 58 6
4 Gutierrez (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
5 Rostenkoski(D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 173 21
6 Hyde (R) R W W W R W W R 3 5 44 68
7 Collins (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 105 8
8 Crane (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 10 122
9 Yates (D) R R A R R R R A 6 0 156 17
10 Porter (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 25 58
11 Sangmeister(D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 31 1
12 Costello (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 30 2
13 Fawell (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 9 49
14 Hastert (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 6 36
15 Ewing (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 2 19
16 Manzullo (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8
17 Evans (D) R R A R R R R R 7 0 62 1
18 Michel (R) W W W W R R W R 3 5 58 138
19 Poshard (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
20 Durbin (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 62 3
INDIANA 1 Visclosky (D) R W R R R R R R 7 1 47 5 2 Sharp (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 99 16 3 Roemer (D) R R R W R R R R 7 1 14 9 4 Long (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 25 5 5 Buyer (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8 6 Burton (R) W W W W R W R W 2 6 8 57 7 Myers (R) W W W A R R R R 4 3 64 91 8 McCloskey (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 65 2 9 Hamilton (D) W R R R R R W R 6 2 141 30 10 Jacobs (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 85 31 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
IOWA
1 Leach (R) R R W W R W W R 4 4 46 42
2 Nussle (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 2 21
3 Lightfoot (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 9 44
4 Smith (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 175 23
5 Grandy (R) W W W W R W W R 2 6 9 33
KANSAS 1 Roberts (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 12 62 2 Slattery (D) W R R R R R R R 7 1 44 20 3 Meyers (R) W R W W R W W R 3 5 15 37 4 Glickman (D) W R R R R R W R 6 2 73 27 KENTUCKY 1 Barlow (D) R R R R R W R R 7 1 7 1 2 Natcher (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 186 25 3 Mazzoli (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 102 27 4 Bunning (R) W W W W W W R R 2 6 6 35 5 Rogers (R) W W R R R W R R 5 3 29 46 6 Baesler (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1 LOUISANA 1 Livingston (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 25 68 2 Jefferson (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 21 2 3 Tauzin (D) W R R W A A R R 4 2 40 34 4 Fields (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 5 McCrery (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8 6 Baker (R) W W W W W W W A 0 7 4 35 7 Hayes (D) W R R W R R W A 4 3 22 18 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
MAINE
1 Andrews (D) R R R R R R R A 7 0 22 0
2 Snowe (R) R W R W R R R R 6 2 52 36
MARYLAND 1 Gilchrest (R) W R R W R R W R 5 3 8 14 2 Bentley (R) W W W W R R R R 4 4 32 20 3 Cardin (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 38 4 4 Wynn (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 5 Hoyer (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 68 5 6 Bartlett (R) W W W W W W R W 1 7 1 7 7 Mfume (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 41 0 8 Morella (R) R R R W R R W R 6 2 27 15 MASSACHUSETTS 1 Oliver (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 21 0 2 Neal (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 31 1 3 Blute (R) R W R W R R R R 6 2 6 2 4 Frank (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 67 7 5 Meehan (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1 6 Torkildsen (R) W W R W R R W R 4 4 4 4 7 Markey (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 87 15 8 Kennedy II (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 38 3 9 Moakley (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 118 10 10 Studds (D) R A R R R R W R 6 1 115 13 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
MICHIGAN
1 Stupak (D) R R R R R W R R 7 1 7 1
2 Hoekstra (R) W W R W W W W R 2 6 2 6
3 VACANT
4 Camp (R) W W W W R W W R 2 6 4 19
5 Barcia (D) R R R R R W R R 7 1 7 1
6 Upton (R) W R R W R R W R 5 3 14 28
7 Smith (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8
8 Carr (D) W R R R R R R R 7 1 53 11
9 Kildee (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 93 10
10 Bonior (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 88 10
11 Knollenberg(R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8
12 Levin (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 61 3
13 Ford (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 164 11
14 Conyers (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 136 19
15 Rose-Collin(D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 23 0
16 Dingell (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 184 16
MINNESOTA 1 Penny (D) W R W R R W W W 3 5 37 28 2 Minge (D) R R W R W W R R 5 3 5 3 3 Ramstad (R) R R W W W W W W 2 6 7 16 4 Vento (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 92 10 5 Sabo (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 77 10 6 Grams (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8 7 Peterson (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 21 2 8 Oberstar (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 117 8 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
MISSISSIPPI
1 Whitten (D) R R R R A A W R 5 1 103 90
2 Thompson (D) W R R R R 4 1 4 1
3 Montgomery (D) W R W W R R W R 4 4 52 109
4 Parker (D) W R W W R R W R 4 4 14 18
5 Taylor (D) R R W W R R R W 5 3 13 16
MISSOURI
1 Clay (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 118 10
2 Talent (R) W W W W W W R R 2 6 2 6
3 Gephardt (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 83 16
4 Skelton (D) W R R R R R W R 6 2 76 25
5 Wheat (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 62 3
6 Danner (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
7 Hancock (R) W W W W A A W W 0 6 1 29
8 Emerson (R) W W R W R W W R 3 5 34 40
9 Volkmer (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 87 16
MONTANA 1 Williams (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 77 8 NEBRASKA 1 Bereuter (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 39 48 2 Hoagland (D) R R R R R R W W 6 2 26 6 3 Barrett (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 2 21 NEVADA 1 Bilbray (D) R R R R R W R R 7 1 38 4 2 Vucanovich (R) W W W W W W R R 2 6 11 53 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
NEW HAMPSHIRE
1 Zeliff (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 2 21
2 Swett (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 20 3
NEW JERSEY 1 Andrews (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 20 3 2 Hughes (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 93 21 3 Saxton (R) R W W W R W R R 4 4 24 27 4 Smith (R) R R R W R R R R 7 1 60 14 5 Roukema (R) R W R W R R W R 5 3 40 34 6 Pallone (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 29 2 7 Franks (R) R R W W R R W R 5 3 5 3 8 Klein (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 9 Torricelli (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 62 2 10 Payne (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 29 0 11 Gallo (R) W W R W R R W R 4 4 21 31 12 Zimmer (R) R R W W R W W R 4 4 9 14 13 Menendez (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 NEW MEXICO 1 Schiff (R) W W W W R W W R 2 6 7 25 2 Skeen (R) W W W W R R W W 2 6 19 56 3 Richardson (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 58 5 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
NEW YORK
1 Hochbrucknr(D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 42 0
2 Lazio (R) R W W W R R W R 4 4 4 4
3 King (R) W W W W R R W R 3 5 3 5
4 Levy (R) W W W W R R W R 3 5 3 5
5 Ackerman (D) R R A R R R R R 7 0 59 2
6 Flake (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 39 1
7 Manton (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 50 2
8 Nadler (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
9 Schumer (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 101 10
10 Towns (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 55 4
11 Owens (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 61 2
12 Velazquez (D) R R R R A A R R 6 0 6 0
13 Molinari (R) R W R W W W W R 3 5 15 16
14 Maloney (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
15 Rangel (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 122 13
16 Serrano (D) R R R R A R R R 7 0 28 0
17 Engel (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 31 0
18 Lowey (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 31 1
19 Fish (D) R R R W R R W R 6 2 6 2
20 Gilman (R) R R R W R R R R 7 1 97 17
21 McNulty (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 32 0
22 Solomon (R) R W A W R W R R 4 3 34 49
23 Boehlert (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 55 10
24 McHugh (R) R W R W R W R R 5 3 93 23
25 Walsh (R) R R R R R W R R 7 1 20 12
26 Hinchey (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
27 Paxon (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 5 27
28 Slaughter (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 42 0
29 LaFalce (D) R R R R A A R R 6 0 100 10
30 Quinn (R) R W R W R R R R 6 2 6 2
31 Houghton (R) W W W W R R W R 3 5 15 27
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
NORTH CAROLINA
1 Clayton (D) R R R R R A R R 7 0 7 0
2 Valentine (D) W W W W R A W W 1 6 34 29
3 Lancaster (D) W R R R W W R R 5 3 22 15
4 Price (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 35 6
5 Neal (D) R R R W R W W R 5 3 54 53
6 Coble (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 7 45
7 Rose (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 90 23
8 Hefner (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 82 26
9 McMillan (R) W W W W R R W W 2 6 11 40
10 Ballenger (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 4 38
11 Taylor (R) W W W W R W R W 2 6 6 36
12 Watt (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
NORTH DAKOTA
1 Pomeroy (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
OHIO 1 Mann (D) R R W W R R W R 5 3 5 3 2 Portman (R) W W W W 0 4 0 4 3 Hall (D) R R R R R R R A 7 0 70 15 4 Oxley (R) W W A W R W W W 1 6 12 60 5 Gillmor (R) R A A W W W W R 2 4 14 16 6 Strickland (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 7 Hobson (R) W W W W R W W R 2 6 4 19 8 Boehner (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 23 9 Kaptur (D) R R R R A A R R 6 0 54 5 10 Hoke (R) R W W W W R R R 4 4 4 4 11 Stokes (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 135 10 12 Kasich (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 17 48 13 Brown (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 14 Sawyer (D) R R R R A R W R 6 1 38 3 15 Pryce (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 1 7 16 Regula (R) R W W W R R R R 5 3 80 49 17 Traficant (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 50 2 18 Applegate (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 93 10 19 Fingerhut (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
OKLAHOMA
1 Inhofe (R) W W W W W W R W 1 7 5 36
2 Synar (D) R R R R R A W R 6 1 62 24
3 Brewster (D) W W R W R W W W 2 6 10 13
4 McCurdy (D) R R W R R W W R 5 3 41 32
5 Istook (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 8
6 English (D) R R W W R W W R 4 4 56 61
OREGON 1 Furse (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 2 Smith (R) W W W W W W W A 0 7 16 48 3 Wyden (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 64 11 4 DeFazio (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 41 0 5 Kopetski (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 21 2 PENNSYLVANIA 1 Foglietta (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 66 4 2 Blackwell (R) R R R R R R R R 8 0 16 0 3 Borski (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 62 1 4 Klink (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 5 Clinger (R) W W W W R W W A 1 6 44 41 6 Holden (D) R R R R R R R A 8 0 8 0 7 Weldon (R) R W W W R W R R 4 4 25 16 8 Greenwood (R) W W W W R R W R 3 5 3 5 9 Shuster (R) W W W W R W R R 3 5 55 71 10 McDade (R) R W A W R W W R 3 4 148 40 11 Kanjorski (D) R R R R R W R R 7 1 51 1 12 Murtha (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 111 10 13 M-Mezvinsky(D) R R R W R R R R 7 1 7 1 14 Coyne (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 72 2 15 McHale (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 16 Walker (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 19 83 17 Gekas (R) W W W W R R W R 3 5 20 44 18 Santorum (R) W R W W R R R R 5 3 10 13 19 Goodling (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 73 113 20 Murphy (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 87 14 21 Ridge (R) W W R W R R W R 4 4 46 19 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
RHODE ISLAND
1 Machtley (R) R R R W R R W R 6 2 18 14
2 Reed (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 23 0
SOUTH CAROLINA 1 Ravenel (R) R W W W W W R W 2 6 18 24 2 Spence (R) W W W W R W R R 3 5 49 89 3 Derrick (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 81 31 4 Inglis (R) W W W W W W R W 1 7 1 7 5 Spratt (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 50 15 6 Clyburn (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 SOUTH DAKOTA 1 Johnson (D) R R W R R R R R 7 1 39 3 TENNESSEE 1 Quillen (R) W A W A R R W W 2 4 77 115 2 Duncan (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 75 104 3 Lloyd (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 68 19 4 Cooper (D) R R A R R W W R 5 2 47 16 5 Clement (D) R R W R R R W R 6 2 31 5 6 Gordon (D) R R R R R W W R 6 2 43 9 7 Sundquist (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 17 48 8 Tanner (D) R R R R R W W R 6 2 21 11 9 Ford (D) A A A A R R W R 3 1 84 12 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
TEXAS
1 Chapman (D) R R R R R W R R 7 1 39 12
2 Wilson (D) R R R R R R R A 7 0 97 17
3 Johnson (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 20
4 Hall (D) W R W W R W R R 4 4 29 45
5 Bryant (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 59 3
6 Barton (R) W A A A W W W W 0 5 2 46
7 Archer (R) W A W W A W W W 0 6 19 121
8 Fields (R) W A W W W W W W 0 7 11 62
9 Brooks (D) R R A R R R R R 7 0 171 26
10 Pickle (D) R R R R R W W W 5 3 46 38
11 Edwards (D) R R W R R W W W 4 4 11 11
12 Geren (D) W R R W R R W W 4 4 11 17
13 Sarpalius (D) W R R R R R W R 6 2 18 14
14 Laughlin (D) W A W R R A W R 3 3 18 9
15 De la Garza(D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 115 55
16 Coleman (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 57 5
17 Stenholm (D) W W W W R R W W 2 6 24 64
18 Washington (D) R R R R R A R R 7 0 25 1
19 Combest (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 4 48
20 Gonzalez (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 188 20
21 Smith (R) R W W W W W W W 1 7 7 34
22 DeLay (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 52
23 Bonilla (R) W W W W W W W R 1 7 1 7
24 Frost (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 70 12
25 Andrews (D) R R R R W W W R 5 3 47 18
26 Armey (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 0 52
27 Ortiz (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 58 6
28 Tejeda (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
29 Green (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0
30 Johnson (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
UTAH
1 Hansen (R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 6 67
2 Shepherd (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
3 Orton (D) W R R W R W R R 5 3 10 13
VERMONT 1 Sanders (IN) R R R R R R R R 8 0 23 0 VIRGINIA 1 Bateman (R) W W W W R W W R 2 6 20 45 2 Pickett (D) W W W W R R W R 3 5 17 23 3 Scott (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 4 Sisisky (D) W R R W R R R R 6 2 44 18 5 Payne (D) W R R R R R W W 5 3 21 10 6 Goodlatte (R) W W W W R R W W 2 6 2 6 7 Bliley (R) W W W W R R W W 2 6 20 55 8 Moran (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 22 11 9 Boucher (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 60 5 10 Wolf (R) W W W W R R W R 3 5 29 44 11 Byrne (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 Issues This
Party Congress Cumulative
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R W R W
WASHINGTON
1 Cantwell (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
2 Swift (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 72 15
3 Unsoeld (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 32 0
4 Inslee (D) R R W R R R W R 6 2 6 2
5 Foley* (D) W R 1 1 132 19
6 Dicks (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 85 16
7 McDermott (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 30 2
8 Dunn (R) W A W W W W W R 1 6 1 6
9 Kreidler (D) R R R R R R W R 7 1 7 1
*Speaker not required to vote
WEST VIRGINIA 1 Mollohan (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 64 0 2 Wise (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 64 1 3 Rahall (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 92 7 WISCONSIN 1 Barca (D) R R R R 4 0 4 0 2 Klug (R) R R W W R W W R 4 4 9 14 3 Gunderson (R) W R W W R W W R 3 5 33 39 4 Kleczka (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 51 3 5 Barrett (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 8 0 6 Petri (R) R W W W A W W W 1 6 30 65 7 Obey (D) R R R R R R R R 8 0 133 19 8 Roth (R) W W W W R W W W 1 7 29 57 9 Sensnbrener(R) W W W W W W W W 0 8 15 72 WYOMING 1 Thomas (R) R W W W W W W W 1 7 5 25 ==================================================== |