WASHINGTON – Here’s how Maine’s members of Congress were recorded on major roll call votes in the week ending July 18.

HOUSE Meat origin labels

Voting 193 for and 208 against, the House on July 14 defeated a bid to require meat sold in the U.S. to be labeled by country of origin, just as fruits and vegetables may be labeled starting next year. This vote occurred as the House passed the fiscal 2004 agricultural appropriations bill (HR 2673), which awaits Senate action.

Denny Rehberg, R-Mont., said: “Do we want to give our producers in America the opportunity to tout the fact that their product was born, raised, and processed in America? Country-of-origin labeling offers shoppers a choice, but also provides farmers and ranchers fairness.”

Henry Bonilla, R-Tex., said: “Any member who votes for this amendment would in essence be voting to increase the grocery bill and create sticker shock the next time Americans go through the meat section in a grocery store.”

A yes vote backed mandatory meat labeling.

Rep. Tom Allen, D, voted yes. Rep. Michael Michaud, D, voted yes.

One percent cut

Voting 68 for and 333 against, the House on July 14 refused to trim discretionary spending in the fiscal 2004 agricultural appropriations bill (HR 2673, above) by one percent, or $170 million. This preserved a spending level of $17 billion for non-entitlement farm programs and agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration. The bill’s total cost, which reflects entitlement payments such as for crop subsidies and Food Stamps, is $77.4 billion, up 3.6 percent over 2003.

Joel Hefley, R-Colo., said that with this year’s deficit topping $400 billion, “Clearly, balancing the budget is no longer a priority in this Congress.”

Robert Goodlatte, R-Va., called the amendment “an assault on rural America, something that we simply cannot tolerate.”

A yes vote backed the budget cut.

Allen and Michaud voted no.

U.N. Population Fund

The House on July 15 voted, 216 for and 211 against, to block U.S. aid to the United Nations Population Fund, which supports programs in 140-plus countries on family planning and women’s reproductive health. This removed $50 million for the fund from a $32.2 billion foreign affairs budget (HR 1950) for fiscal 2004, which awaits Senate action.

Critics say the fund helps China enforce population control, while supporters say it alleviates human suffering and slows population growth. Under U.S. law, federal funding is banned to international groups that perform or facilitate abortions.

Christopher Smith, R-N.J., called the fund “the chief apologist for China’s coercive one-child-per-couple policy. By its words and by its actions, (it) has chosen to partner with those who oppress women.”

Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., said: “Nearly 600,000 women die each year from causes related to pregnancy,” mostly in poor countries. “Many of these deaths could be prevented through maternal care and through family planning to space those pregnancies.”

A yes vote was to deny aid to the population fund.

Allen and Michaud voted no.

U.N. dues

Voting 187 for and 237 against, the House on July 15 refused to reduce U.S. dues to the United Nations to the level paid by France. In 2003, this would lower the U.S. payment from $341 million to about $87 million, a 74 percent cut. The amendment specified that U.S. dues could not exceed those paid by any other permanent member of the Security Council. At $87 million, France ranks second to the U.S. Dues to the U.N. are based on a country’s share of the world’s gross domestic product.

Steve King, R-Iowa, said: “Even though the U.S. has no more power on the Security Council than any of the other four permanent members, it pays the lion’s share of the (U.N.) budget.”

Henry Hyde, R-Ill., said the amendment “takes a unilateral approach which could potentially harm U.S. interests and objectives around the world.”

A yes vote was to slash U.S. dues to the U.N.

Allen and Michaud voted no.

Bioterrorism

Voting 421 for and two against, the House on July 16 passed a bill (HR 2122) authorizing a $5.6 billion federal fund to spur the development and stockpiling of drugs and vaccines to counter biological, chemical or radiological attacks on the U.S. populace. The sum actually spent will depend on later action on appropriations bills. The bill provides financial incentives for the private sector to develop pharmaceuticals and other countermeasures that have no broad commercial application.

The dissenting votes were cast by Ron Paul, R-Tex., and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz.

The bill, which awaits Senate action, also relaxes Food and Drug Administration safety rules to speed the testing and use of drugs and medical devices for responding to bioterrorism.

Christopher Cox, R-Calif., said the bill would “stimulate the invention, the productivity, the research that is necessary to find these antidotes, these vaccines to bioweapons…for which countermeasures do not presently exist.”

No member spoke against the bill.

A yes vote was to pass the bill.

Allen and Michaud voted yes.

SENATE

Military pork

The Senate on July 16 voted, 79 for and 16 against, to retain more than $7 million in the fiscal 2004 defense appropriations bill (HR 2658) for five “earmarks” favored by certain senators. The funds are among $4 billion in the bill for thousands of projects regarded as pork barrel by watchdog groups but defended as militarily important by Senate sponsors.

The projects preserved by this vote concern the eradication of brown tree snakes in Hawaii, extracting fuel from canola oil, performing Shakespeare on military bases, renovating a hangar at the closed Griffiss Air Force Base in New York and funding The Academy for Closing and Avoiding Achievement Gaps in Baton Rouge, La.

Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, defended four of the projects as having direct military value, adding, “I regret to say I disagree” with the sponsor of the amendment.

Sponsor John McCain, R-Ariz., said: “When some of our soldiers and sailors still receive Food Stamps and live in inadequate housing, we find a way to provide over $4 billion in unnecessary spending through the defense appropriations bill.”

A yes vote was to retain the disputed projects.

Sen. Susan Collins, R, voted yes. Sen. Olympia Snowe, R, voted yes.