Jared Polis on Environment

We are loving our public lands to death; needs upgrades

We cannot create a system that excludes rural Colorado. We must deliver for everyone in our state, and it's going to take all of us in this room working together to get it done. By investing in our infrastructure and providing more affordable and convenient transportation options, we will be relieving traffic congestion while also reducing the harmful emissions that blacken our skies and contribute to the climate emergency that remains the challenge of our generation.

Voted NO 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 YES on protecting free-roaming horses and burros.

1. Ensure that acreage available for wild and free-roaming horses and burros is at least equal to the acreage where they were found in 1971
2. update the inventory of such horses and burros annually
3. maintain a thriving natural ecological balance on lands where such horses and burros are found
4. establish sanctuaries for such horses and burros
5. research and implement enhanced fertility control for mares & stallions.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. NICK RAHALL (D, WV-3): Earlier this year, the BLM made a truly shocking announcement. This Federal agency announced future plans to destroy, i.e., slaughter, 30,000 healthy wild horses and burros entrusted to their care by the American people. How in the world can a Federal agency be considering massive slaughter of animals the law says they are supposed to be protecting? The bill before us gives the agency as many options as possible to avoid destroying these animals.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. DOC HASTINGS (R, WA-4): Across our Nation, Americans are struggling to pay their bills; 9.5% of Americans are out of work. With this backdrop, what is the response of this Democrat Congress to record unemployment and skyrocketing deficits? Their response is to create a $700 million welfare program for wild horses and burros. If the American people want an illustration of just how out of touch this Congress has become on spending, they need to look no further. In the last Congress, the House passed legislation to ban the commercial slaughter of wild horses and burros, that cost taxpayers less than $500,000 a year. Now we're looking at a bill that, again, bans slaughter of these animals but then proceeds to spend $700 million to create a new welfare program for wild horses. Republicans are focused on creating the jobs in this country, but this Democrat Congress seems to be more worried about wild burros and wild horses.

Make tax deduction permanent for conservation easements.

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.

Regulate all dog breeders down to kennels of 50 dogs.

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.

Prohibit invasive research on great apes.

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.

Rated 100% by HSLF, indicating a pro-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.

Tighten restrictions on hydrogen sulfide emissions.

Congressional Summary:This Act may be cited as the 'Bringing Reductions to Energy's Airborne Toxic Health Effects Act' or the BREATHE Act.

• Repeals the exemption for aggregation of emissions from oil and gas sources (CAA section 112(n) paragraph 4).
• Considers hydrogen sulfide as a hazardous air pollutant, including oil and gas wells as sources of hydrogen sulfide.

Proponent's argument for bill: (StopTheFrackAttack.org, July 2012 BREATHE Act Fact Sheet):

The BREATHE Act would close two exemptions in the Clean Air Act (CAA) that threaten the health of communities wrestling with oil and gas production in their backyard. The CAA established limits for major pollution sources; smaller sources of pollutants that are controlled by a single operator, located close to each other, are "aggregated" and considered as one source of emissions. Unfortunately, the CAA exempts oil and gas wells from aggregation. The BREATHE Act would apply the CAA to oil & gas production.

A 1993 EPA Report to Congress on Hydrogen Sulfide Air Emissions Associated with the Extraction of Oil and Natural Gas clear

Require labeling genetically engineered food.

Congressional Summary:

• [Require labeling] any food that has been genetically engineered or contains genetically engineered ingredients.
• Defines "genetically engineered" (GE) as a material intended for human consumption that is an organism produced through the intentional use of genetic engineering, or its progeny, without regard to whether the altered molecular or cellular characteristics of the organism are detectable.

Discussion of pro/con (Huffington Post 4/25/2013):

Polls show that the overwhelming majority of Americans--over 90%--supports mandatory labeling of foods with GE ingredients. 64 other countries already require such labels. However, strong opposition from the agriculture and biotech industries has scuttled proposals for GMO (Genetically-Modified Organisms) labeling laws in the past. The most recent and high-profile of these failed attempts at a GMO labeling requirement was California's Proposition 37, which was narrowly defeated after opponents spent $50 million lobbying against it. "Unfortunately, advocates of mandatory GMO labeling are working an agenda to vilify biotechnology and scare consumers away from safe and healthful food products," a Biotechnology Industry Organization spokeswoman wrote.

Argument in opposition (Food Democracy Now 5/26/2012):

Exactly 20 years ago today, the first Bush administration declared genetically engineered foods to be "substantially equivalent" to foods that farmers had traditionally bred for thousands of years. With this single policy, the US government radically altered the food supply, introducing novel genes into our food that had never before been consumed by humans. Corporate executives at Monsanto colluded with elected officials to make sure that their new "products" were placed onto the market as quickly as possible. Two decades later, Americans are still denied the basic right to know what's in their food because of this infamous policy.

Voted NO on requiring limited GMO labeling.

A BILL to require the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a national disclosure standard for bioengineered foods.

Cato Institute recommendation on voting YES: President Obama quietly signed legislation requiring special labeling for commercial foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs)--plants and animals with desirable genetic traits that were directly implanted in a laboratory. Most of the foods that humans & animals have consumed for millennia have been genetically modified, by cross-fertilization. Yet the new law targets only the highly precise gene manipulations done in laboratories. Anti-GMO activists oppose the new law because it preempts more rigorous regulation. And that's exactly the goal of this bill, to the frustration of the anti-GMO crowd.

JustLabelit.org recommendation on voting NO (because not restrictive enough): Senators Roberts (R-KS) and Stabenow (D-MI) introduced a compromise bill that would create a mandatory, national labeling standard for GMO foods. This bill falls short of what consumers expect--a simple at-a-glance disclosure on the package. As written, this compromise might not even apply to ingredients derived from GMO soybeans and GMO sugar beets. We in the consumer rights community have dubbed this the "Deny Americans the Right-to-Know" Act (DARK Act). We need to continue pressing for mandatory GMO labeling on the package.

Heritage Foundation recommendation on voting NO (because too restrictive): The House should allow [states, at their choice,] to impose [a more] restrictive labeling mandate, but prohibit the state from regulating out-of-state food manufacturers engaged in interstate commerce. Instituting a new, sweeping, federal mandate that isn't based on proven science shouldn't even be an option.

Legislative outcome: Passed by the Senate on July 7th, passed by the House on July 14th; signed by the President on July 29th

Keep restrictive rules for predator control in Alaska.

Library of Congress Summary: This joint resolution nullifies the rule finalized by the Department of the Interior on Aug. 5, 2016, relating to non-subsistence takings of wildlife and public participation and closure procedures on National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska.

Case for voting YES by House Republican Policy Committee: The Fish and Wildlife Service rule--which lays claim to more than 20% of Alaska--violates ANILCA (Alaska National Interest Land Conservation Act) and the Alaska Statehood Compact. Not only does [the existing 2016 rule] undermine Alaska's ability to manage fish and wildlife upon refuge lands, it fundamentally destroys a cooperative relationship between Alaska and the federal government.

Case for voting NO by the Sierra Club (April 6, 2017):

• President Trump signed H.J. Res. 69, overturning the rule that banned "predator control" on federal wildlife refuges in Alaska unless "based on sound science in response to a conservation concern."
• Any rule mentioning "sound science" is in trouble under a Trump administration.
• So what kinds of practices will the Trump administration now allow on our federal wildlife refuges? Activities that include shooting or trapping wolves while in their dens with pups, or hunting for grizzly bears from airplanes.
• It's all about ensuring a maximum yield of prey species like elk, moose, and caribou for the real apex predator: humans. So if having more elk requires killing wolf pups in their dens, then so be it.
• The Obama administration's rule (which Trump revoked) never tried to stop all hunting. Subsistence hunting was still allowed. What's changed is that the predators on federal wildlife refuges are now under the control of the state of Alaska. And that makes them prey.

Click here for definitions & background information on Environment. Click here for a summary of all issue stances of Jared Polis. Click here for a Wikipedia profile of Jared Polis. Click here for a Ballotpedia profile of Jared Polis. Click here for VoteMatch responses by Jared Polis. Click here for issue positions of other CO politicians. Click here for CO primary archives. Click here for CO secondary archives.
Other governors on Environment:			Jared Polis on other issues:
CO Gubernatorial: Bob Beauprez Cary Kennedy Cynthia Coffman Donna Lynne Doug Robinson Ed Perlmutter George Brauchler Greg Lopez Heidi Ganahl John Hickenlooper Matthew Hess Michael Bennet Mike Johnston Steve Barlock Tom Tancredo Victor Mitchell Walker Stapleton CO Senatorial: Alice Madden Andrew Romanoff Angela Williams Cory Gardner Dan Baer Darryl Glenn Ellen Burnes John Hickenlooper John Walsh Jon Keyser Michael Bennet Mike Johnston Peg Littleton Ryan Frazier Tim Neville	Gubernatorial Debates 2021: CA Recall: S.D.Mayor Kevin_Faulconer(R) vs.Former Gov. nominee John Cox(R) vs.Former U.S.Rep Doug Ose(R) vs.Laura Smith(R) vs.Former Olympian Caitlyn Jenner(R) vs.Radio Host Larry Elder(R) vs.Kevin Paffrath(D) vs.Gavin Newsom(D) NJ: Incumbent Phil Murphy(D) vs.State Rep. Jack Ciattarelli(R) vs.Candidate Hirsh Singh(R) vs.GOP Chair Doug Steinhardt(R) VA: Incumbent Ralph Northam(D,term-limited) vs.Former Governor Terry McAuliffe(D) vs.CEO Glenn Youngkin(R) vs.A.G. Mark Herring(D) vs.State Sen. Amanda Chase(I) vs.Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax(D) vs.State Rep. Jennifer Carroll Foy(D) vs.State Rep. Lee Carter(D) vs.State Sen. Jennifer McClellan(D) vs.State Rep. Kirk Cox(R) vs.CEO Pete Snyder(R) Gubernatorial Debates 2023: KY: Incumbent Andy Beshear(D) vs.Former Gov. Matt Bevin(? R) vs.Senator Rand Paul(? R) vs.State Auditor Mike Harmon(R) LA: Incumbent John Bel Edwards(D,term-limited) vs.Biden Adviser Cedric Richmond(? D) vs.Senator John Neely Kennedy(? R) MS: Incumbent Tate Reeves(R) vs.Bill Waller(R) Gubernatorial Debates 2022: AK: Incumbent Mike Dunleavy(R) vs.Bill Walker(I) vs.Les Gara(D) vs.Billy Toien(L) vs.State Rep. Chris Kurka(R) AL: Incumbent Kay Ivey(R) vs.Chris Countryman(D) vs.Stacy Lee George(R) vs.Ambassador Lynda Blanchard(R) vs.State Sen. Malika Sanders-Fortier(D) vs.Challenger Tim James(R) AR: Incumbent Asa Hutchinson(R,term-limited) vs.Trump Adviser Sarah Huckabee Sanders(R) vs.A.G. Leslie Rutledge(R,withdrew Nov.2021) vs.Ricky Dale Harrington(L) vs.Anthony Bland(D) AZ: Incumbent Doug Ducey(R,term-limited) Mayor Marco Lopez(D) vs.Former news anchor Kari Lake(R) vs.Secretary of State Katie Hobbs(D) vs.State Treasurer Kimberly Yee(R) vs.U.S.Rep.Matt Salmon(R) vs.Steve Gaynor(R) vs.State Rep.Aaron Lieberman(D) vs.Jorge Rivas(R) vs.Karrin Taylor Robson(R) CA: Incumbent Gavin Newsom(D) vs.S.D.Mayor Kevin_Faulconer(R) vs.Former Gov. nominee John Cox(R) vs.Kevin Paffrath(D) vs.State Sen. Brian Dahle(R) CO: Incumbent Jared Polis(D) vs.Mayor Greg Lopez(R) vs.Heidi Ganahl(R) CT: Incumbent Ned Lamont(D) vs.Bob Stefanowski(? R) FL: Incumbent Ron DeSantis(R) vs.Former Gov.Charlie Crist(D) vs.Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried(D) vs.Annette Taddeo(D) vs.Brian Moore(G) GA: Incumbent Brian Kemp(R) vs.Minority Leader Stacey Abrams(D) vs.Senate candidate Shane Hazel(L) vs.State Rep.Vernon Jones(R) vs.2020 candidate Kandiss Taylor(R) vs.Senator David Perdue(R) HI: Incumbent David Ige(D,term-limited) vs.Marissa Kerns(R) vs.Lt.Gov.Josh Green(D) vs.Vicky Cayetano(D) vs.Paul Morgan(R) vs.State Rep.Kirk Caldwell(D) vs.U.S.Rep.Kai Kahele(D) IA: Incumbent Kim Reynolds(R) vs.Deidre DeJear(D) vs.State Rep.Ras Smith(D) ID: Incumbent Brad Little(R) vs.Raul Labrador(R) vs.Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin(R) vs.Ammon Bundy(R) vs.Ed Humphreys(R) IL: Incumbent J.B. Pritzker(D) vs.State Sen.Darren Bailey(R) vs.Paul Schimpf(R) vs.Jesse Sullivan(R) KS: Incumbent Laura Kelly(D) vs.Jeff Colyer(R) vs.State Sen.Derek Schmidt(R) vs.Chase LaPorte(R)	Gubernatorial Debates 2022 (continued): MA: Incumbent Charlie Baker(R) vs.Lt.Gov.Karyn Polito(R) vs.State Rep. Geoff Diehl(R) vs.Harvard Professor Danielle Allen(D) vs.State Sen.Ben Downing(D) vs.State Sen.Sonia Chang-Diaz(D) vs.Shiva Ayyadurai(I) vs.A.G. Maura Healey(D) MD: Incumbent Larry Hogan(R,term-limited) vs.State Del.Robin Ficker(R) vs.State Del.Peter Franchot(D) vs.State Del.Kelly M. Schulz(R) vs.Secretary John B. King(D) vs.Ashwani Jain(D) vs.State A.G. Doug Gansler(D) vs.County Exec. Rushern Baker(D) vs.Secretary Thomas Perez(D) vs.Wes Moore(D) vs.Dan Cox(R) ME: Incumbent Janet Mills(D) vs.Former Gov. Paul LePage(R) MI: Incumbent Gretchen Whitmer(D) vs.Chief James Craig(R) vs.Police Chief Tudor Dixon(R) vs.Garrett Soldano(R) vs.John E. James(? R) MN: Incumbent Tim Walz(DFL) vs.Mayor Mike Murphy(R) vs.State Sen.Scott Jensen(R) vs.Michelle Benson(R) vs.Paul Gazelka(R) NE: Incumbent Pete Ricketts(R,term-limited) vs.U.S.Senator Bob Krist(R) vs.Chuck Herbster(R) vs.Jim Pillen(R) vs.Brett Lindstrom(R) vs.Carol Blood(D) vs.State Sen. Theresa Thibodeau(R) NH: Incumbent Chris Sununu(R) vs.Dan Feltes(D) vs.Karen Testerman(R) NM: Incumbent Michelle Lujan Grisham(D) vs.Commissioner Jay Block(R) vs.State Rep.Rebecca Dow(R) vs.Mark Ronchetti(R) NV: Incumbent Steve Sisolak(D) vs.A.G.Adam Laxalt(R) vs.North Las Vegas Mayor John Lee(R) vs.Dean Heller(R) vs.Joe Lombardo(R) vs.Mayor Michele Fiore(R) NY: Incumbent Andrew Cuomo(D,resigned) vs.Acting Gov.Kathy Hochul(D) vs.Rob Astorino(R) vs.Andrew Giuliani(R) vs.US.Rep.Lee Zeldin(R) vs.Tom Suozzi(D) vs.Attorney General Letitia James(D) OH: Incumbent Mike DeWine(R) vs.Former Rep.Jim Renacci(R) vs.Dayton Mayor Nan Whaley(D) vs.Mayor John Cranley(D) OK: Incumbent Kevin Stitt(R) vs.State Sen. Ervin Yen(R) vs.Connie Johnson(D) vs.Joy Hofmeister(D) vs.Natalie Bruno(L) OR: Incumbent Kate Brown(D,term-limited) vs.Gov. nominee Bud Pierce(R) vs.Paul Romero(R) vs.Casey Kulla(D) vs.Kerry McQuisten(R) vs.Tina Kotek(D) vs.Nicholas Kristof(D) vs.Tobias Read(D) vs.State Rep. Christine Drazan(R) PA: Incumbent Tom Wolf(D,term-limited) vs.U.S.Rep. Lou Barletta(R) vs.Commissioner Joe Gale(R) vs.A.G.Josh Shapiro(D) vs.William McSwain(R) vs.U.S.Rep.Melissa Hart(R) vs.State Sen.Scott Martin(R) vs.State Sen. Scott Martin(R) vs.State Sen. Doug Mastriano(R) RI: Incumbent Gina Raimondo(D,to Cabinet) vs.Gov. Dan McKee(D) vs.Secy.Matt Brown(D) vs.Mayor Allan Fung(R ?) vs.Luis-Daniel Munoz(D) vs.RI Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea(D) vs.Seth Magainer(D) vs.Helena Foulkes(D) SC: Incumbent Henry McMaster(R) vs.US.Rep.Joe Cunningham(D) vs.State senator Mia McLeod(D) SD: Incumbent Kristi Noem(R) vs.State Rep. Billie Sutton(? D) vs.Speaker Steven Haugaard(R) TN: Incumbent Bill Lee(R) vs.Carnita Atwater(D) vs.J B Smiley(D) TX: Incumbent Greg Abbott(R) vs.Beto O`Rourke(D) vs.Chad Prather(R) vs.State Sen.Don Huffines(R) vs.U.S.Rep. Allen West(R) vs.Deidre Gilbert(D) VT: Incumbent Phil Scott(R) (no prospective opponents yet) WI: Incumbent Tony Evers(D) vs.CEO Jonathan Wichmann(R) vs.Rebecca Kleefisch(R) vs.State Rep. Timothy Ramthun(R) WY: Incumbent Mark Gordon(R) vs.Rex Rammell(R) vs.Minority Leader Chris Rothfuss(? D)	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 Contact info: Email Contact Form Mailing Address: Cannon HOB 501, Washington, DC 20515 Official Website