Highlights:
Scott’s Most Recent And Lifetime Scores From The League Of Conservation Voters Was 6%. According to the League of Conservation Voters, Tim Scott had a 6% lifetime and 2023 score on the group’s scorecard. [League of Conservation Voters, viewed 6/11/24]
2015: Scott Voted Against Reducing Carbon Pollution In Response To Human-Caused Climate Change. In March 2015, Scott voted against an amendment to the Senate’s FY 2016 budget resolution that, according to The Hill, would have “called on lawmakers to recognize that climate change is real and caused by human activity. The amendment also called on Congress to take action to cut carbon pollution.” The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 49 to 50. [Senate Vote 89, 3/25/15; The Hill, 3/25/15; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 777; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11]
2022: Scott Voted To Include Provisions In The America COMPETES Act That Would Emphasize That The President Does Not Have The Power To Invoke Defense Production Act Authorities Or Declare A National Emergency, Major Disaster Emergency, Or Public Health Emergency On The Basis Of Climate Change. In May 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Scott voted for the “motion to instruct Senate conferees to insist on the inclusion of provisions that would emphasize that under current law the president may not, on the basis of climate change, invoke Defense Production Act authorities or declare a national emergency, major disaster emergency or public health emergency.” The vote was on a motion to instruct. The Senate agreed to the motion by a vote of 49-47. [Senate Vote 157, 5/4/22; Congressional Quarterly, 5/4/22; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4521]
2024: Scott Attacked “Far-Left Climate Activists,” Calling Their Proposed Policies “Draconian.” According to Scott via his Senate Twitter, “Gas stoves, plastic straws and now car tires. Far-left climate activists are determined to impose draconian bans and dictate to Americans how they live their day-to-day lives.” [Scott via Twitter, 2/9/24]
2023: Scott Said It Was “Ridiculous” To Discuss A Climate Emergency While “We Have A Border Emergency.” According to The Hill, “‘This is ridiculous to talk about a climate emergency when we have a border emergency that is an existential threat right now,’ he added. Asked if he believed people were experiencing climate change and if it was caused by fossil fuels, Scott said ‘the climate is obviously changing’ while arguing Americans should not be offshoring jobs to countries ‘that have not impacted their actual carbon footprint.’” [The Hill, 8/9/23]
2016: Scott Voted To Prohibit Future Trade Deals From Requiring Climate Change Obligations As Part Of A Customs And Trade Enforcement Bill. In February 2016, Scott voted for legislation that modified future U.S. trade objectives to include a requirement that no trade deal could include climate change obligations as part of a customs and trade enforcement bill. According to Congressional Quarterly, the legislation would have “amend[ed] the Trade Promotion Authority law (PL 114-26) enacted earlier this year to add more negotiating objectives for future trade agreements, including language: […] To ensure that trade agreements ‘do not establish obligations for the United States regarding greenhouse gas emissions measures, including obligations that require changes to U.S. laws or regulations or that would affect the implementation of such laws or regulations,’ other than those fulfilling other negotiating objectives in TPA.” The underlying legislation was a conference report that would have “formally establish[ed] the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and authorize[d] the CBP to use an automated import-export processing system […] strengthen[ed] enforcement of intellectual property rights and […] would [have] permanently ban[ned] state and local taxation of Internet access and ends grandfathered Internet access taxation in seven states.” The vote was on the conference report. The Senate passed the legislation by a vote of 75 to 20. The House has already passed the legislation, thus the bill has been sent to the president. [Senate Vote 22, 2/11/16; Congressional Quarterly, 12/11/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/10/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 644]
2012: Scott Voted To Repeal EPA Findings On The Harmful Effects Of Carbon Pollution. In September 2012, Scott voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “str[uck] language to repeal EPA findings on the harmful effects of carbon pollution.” The underlying bill pertained to censuring the Obama administration for various environmental and energy policies. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 178 to 229. [House Vote 593, 9/21/12; Congressional Quarterly, 9/21/12; Congressional Quarterly, 9/18/12; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1485; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3409]
2013: Scott Voted For Prohibiting The Federal Government From Regulating Greenhouse Gasses. In March 2013, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to The Hill’s E2 Wire, “would have prohibited federal greenhouse gas regulations.” The vote was on the amendment, offered against the Senate’s version of the fiscal year 2014 budget resolution; the Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 47 to 52. [Senate Vote 76, 3/22/13; The Hill’s E2 Wire, 3/23/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 359; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 8]
Scott Signed Onto Congressional Review Act Resolution To Nullify “National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Implementing Regulations Revisions.” According to a press release from Senator Cramer’s office, “U.S. Senators Kevin Cramer (R-ND), member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Dan Sullivan (R-AK) introduced a joint resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), with the other 48 of their Senate Republican colleagues to nullify the Biden Administration’s new regulation, “National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Implementing Regulations Revisions.” The regulation reverses common sense permitting reforms implemented by the Trump Administration, further bogging down the federal permitting process and delaying vital infrastructure projects. The White House Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) NEPA rules also undermine important provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act intended to streamline key elements of our broken federal permitting process. […] Joining Senator Cramer and Sullivan are Senators […] Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Roy Blunt (R-MO), Tim Scott (R-SC), Mike Braun (R-IN), and Susan Collins (R-ME).” [Senator Cramer – Press Release, 7/19/22]
2011: Scott Voted To Prohibit The Agriculture Department From Implementing Climate Change Policies. In June 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “bar[red] the use of funds in the bill to implement the Department of Agriculture regulation titled ‘Policy Statement on Climate Change Adaptation.’” The underlying bill provided for Fiscal Year 2012 Agriculture Appropriations. The House agreed to the amendment by a vote of 238 to 179. The amendment was included in the House passed version, but was not included in the conference report that became law. [House Vote 448, 6/16/11; Congressional Quarterly, 6/16/11; Bill Text, H.R. 2112; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 467; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2112]
2011: Scott Voted To Prohibit The Environmental Protection Agency And The States From Addressing Climate Change By Regulating Greenhouse Gases. In April 2011, Scott voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] prohibit[ed] the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases in any effort to address climate change. It would [have] amend[ed] the Clean Air Act to strike specific elements from the definition of ‘air pollutant,’ unless regulation of those chemicals is not used in an attempt to address climate change. It also would [have] clarif[ied] that the bill does not limit the authority of a state to regulate the emission of a greenhouse gas, unless the regulation attempts to address climate change.” The vote was on passage of the bill; the House passed it by a vote of 255 to 172. The bill was subsequently sent to the Senate, which took no substantive action on the measure. [House Vote 249, 4/7/11; Congressional Quarterly, 4/7/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 910]
2011: Scott Voted For A Bill That Would Prohibit U.S. Contribution To The Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change. In February 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “bar[red] the use of funds made available in the bill for contributions to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” The underlying bill pertained to continuing appropriations for FY 2011. The vote was on adopting the amendment; the House adopted the amendment by a vote of 244 to 179. The House passed the underlying bill and the Senate amended the bill, but it was not taken up by the House again. [House Vote 132, 2/19/11; Congressional Quarterly, 2/19/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 154; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
2012: Scott Voted To Defund The National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Climate Change Education Partnership Program. In May 2012, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] bar[red] the use of funds in the bill to carry out the National Science Foundation’s Climate Change Education Partnership program.” The amendment was to a bill that funded science-related programs and the Departments of Commerce and Justice for fiscal year 2013; the House adopted the amendment by a vote of 238 to 188. The House later passed the underlying bill, but the Senate took no substantive action on it. [House Vote 241, 5/9/12; Congressional Quarterly, 5/9/12; CRS Summary of H.R. 5326, 5/10/12; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1088; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5326]
2011: Scott Voted To Prevent The Establishment Of A National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration Climate Service. In February 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “bar[red] the use of funds made available in the bill to establish a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Climate Service, as described in a published draft framework.” The underlying bill pertained to continuing appropriations for FY 2011. The vote was on adopting the amendment; the House adopted the amendment by a vote of 233 to 187. The House passed the underlying bill and the Senate amended the bill, but it was not taken up by the House again. [House Vote 127, 2/19/11; Congressional Quarterly, 2/19/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 148; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
2022: Scott Voted Against The Inflation Reduction Act. In August 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Tim Scott voted against the Inflation Reduction Act. The vote was on passage. The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 50-50, with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the tie-breaking vote in favor of the bill. The bill was sent to the House for final concurrence. The House concurred with the Senate, sent the bill to President Biden for signage, and the bill became law. [Senate Vote 325, 8/7/22; Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 5194; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5376]
The Inflation Reduction Act Included A Package Of Tax Credits To Incentivize Wind, Solar, And Renewable Energy. According to the Washington Post, “To respond to a rapidly warming planet, Democrats set aside about $370 billion for energy security and climate change. The investments include a bevy of tax credits to incentivize wind, solar and other renewable power sources, while helping people purchase new or used electric vehicles and install energy-efficient heating and cooling systems in their homes.” [Washington Post, 8/7/22]
The Inflation Reduction Act Included Investments To Help People Buy New Or Used Electric Vehicles. According to the Washington Post, “To respond to a rapidly warming planet, Democrats set aside about $370 billion for energy security and climate change. The investments include a bevy of tax credits to incentivize wind, solar and other renewable power sources, while helping people purchase new or used electric vehicles and install energy-efficient heating and cooling systems in their homes.” [Washington Post, 8/7/22]
The Bill Provided $3 Billion For Zero-Emission Vehicles For The U.S. Postal Service. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The bill would provide funding for various activities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote energy-efficient technologies and mitigate the impacts of climate change, including […] $3 billion for zero-emission vehicles for the Postal Service;” [Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22]
The Inflation Reduction Act Included Increased Tax Credits For New Energy-Efficient Residencies. According to Congressional Quarterly, the Inflation Reduction Act “increase[d] credits for new energy efficient homes.” [Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22]
The Inflation Reduction Act Included Investments To Help People Implement Energy-Efficient Heating And Cooling Systems In Their Residential Homes. According to the Washington Post, “To respond to a rapidly warming planet, Democrats set aside about $370 billion for energy security and climate change. The investments include a bevy of tax credits to incentivize wind, solar and other renewable power sources, while helping people purchase new or used electric vehicles and install energy-efficient heating and cooling systems in their homes.” [Washington Post, 8/7/22]
The Inflation Reduction Act Provided $3 Billion For Environmental And Climate Justice Block Grants For Community Projects To Address Pollution, Lowering Emissions, Climate Resiliency, And Public Engagement. According to Congressional Quarterly, the Inflation Reduction Act provided “$3 billion for new EPA environmental and climate justice block grants for community-led activities to address pollution, emission reduction, climate resiliency and public engagement.” [Senate Vote 325, 8/7/22; Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 5194; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5376]
The Bill Provided $27 Billion In Grants For State, Local, And Non-Profit Entities To Address Greenhouse Gas Emissions. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The bill would provide funding for various activities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote energy-efficient technologies and mitigate the impacts of climate change, including $27 billion for grants to state, local and nonprofit entities for greenhouse gas emission reduction activities;” [Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22]
The Bill Provided $9.7 Billion For Zero-Emission Or Carbon Capture Rural Electric Systems. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The bill would provide funding for various activities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote energy-efficient technologies and mitigate the impacts of climate change, including […] $9.7 billion for zero-emission or carbon capture rural electric systems;” [Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22]
The Bill Provided $1.6 Billion For Methane Emissions Reduction And Mitigation. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The bill would provide funding for various activities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote energy-efficient technologies and mitigate the impacts of climate change, including […] $1.6 billion for methane emissions reduction and mitigation.” [Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22]
The Inflation Reduction Act Created A $1.5 Billion Program That Included Incentives For Companies That Reduce Methane Emissions And Penalties For Companies That Do Not Mitigate Methane Emissions. According to the Washington Post, “The bill creates a $1.5 billion program that includes new payments for companies that cut emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, with some penalties for those firms that do not.” [Washington Post, 8/7/22]
The Bill Reinstated The Superfund Tax On Crude Oil At A Higher Tax Rate To Support The Clean-Up Of Contaminated And Polluted Sites. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The measure would also reinstate the lapsed ‘Superfund’ tax on oil producers and importers at a higher rate, with the money going to help clean up contaminated sites.” [Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22]
2017: Scott Called On Trump To Withdraw The U.S. From The Paris Climate Agreement. According to the State (SC), “South Carolina’s junior senator is one of 22 members of the Senate calling on President Donald Trump to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. Tim Scott signed onto a letter signed by other Republican senators asking Trump to revoke the landmark deal to combat climate change agreed to by almost 200 nations in the French capital in 2015. The letter, sent to Trump last week, congratulates him on rolling back climate regulations enacted under President Barack Obama. ‘A key risk to fulfilling this objective is remaining in the Paris Agreement,’ it reads. ‘(R)emaining in it would subject the United States to significant litigation risk that could upend your Administration’s ability to fulfill its goal of rescinding (Obama’s) Clean Power Plan. ‘Accordingly, we strongly advise you to make a clean break from the Paris Agreement.’” [The State (SC), 6/2/17]
2023: A Scott Spokesperson Said Scott Would Withdraw From The Paris Climate Agreement. According to the Daily Caller, “South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott would also withdraw from the Paris Accords, a spokesperson told the DCNF. The senator has been highly critical of both the EPA and the IRA, but a spokesperson for the senator did not say what actions he would take against either if elected president.” [Daily Caller, 8/13/23]
Scott Received $1,022,844 From The Oil And Gas Industry During His Entire Time In Congress. According to Open Secrets, Tim Scott received $1,022,844 from the oil and gas industry during his time in Congress through the beginning of 2024. [Open Secrets, accessed 6/13/24]
Scott Received Over $300,000 From Oil And Gas Companies In The 2022 Cycle. According to Open Secrets, Tim Scott received $300,484 from the oil and gas industry during the 2022 election cycle. [Open Secrets, accessed 4/20/23]
2022: Scott Voted To Require The Immediate Development Of An Oil And Gas Leasing Program Through 2027 That Would Provide At Least Two Leases In The Gulf Of Mexico And Alaska Region Per Year In The America COMPETES Act. In May 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Scott voted for the “motion to instruct Senate conferees to insist on the inclusion of provisions that would require the immediate development of an oil and gas leasing program through 2027 that provides at least two oil and gas leases in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska regions of the outer continental shelf per calendar year, including at least one lease annually in the Gulf of Mexico region.” The vote was on a motion to instruct. The Senate agreed to the motion by a vote of 53-44. [Senate Vote 148, 5/4/22; Congressional Quarterly, 5/4/22; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4521]
Scott Said He Would Increase Oil And Gas Development On Federal Lands According to CNN, “Scott says in his plan he will encourage domestic fuel production and undo Biden administration policies and executive actions on energy – including approving the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline and increasing oil and gas development on federal lands.” [CNN, 9/14/23]
2013: Scott Voted To Open The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) To Oil And Gas Drilling, As Part Of Senator Rand Paul’s Proposed Budget. In March 2013, Scott voted for opening ANWR to oil and gas drilling, as part of Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2013 to 2023. According to a press release from Sen. Paul, the budget includes a provision “[o]pen[ing] ANWR to drilling.” The vote was on an amendment to the Senate budget resolution replacing the entire budget with Paul’s proposed budget; the Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 18 to 81. [Senate Vote 69, 3/22/13; Senator Rand Paul press release, 3/22/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 263; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 8]
2012: Scott Voted To Support Opening The Outer Continental Shelf, ANWR, Gulf Of Mexico, And Rocky Mountains To Drilling. In March 2012, Scott voted to support approving drilling in the outer continental shelf ANWR, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Rocky Mountains, as part of the Republican Study Committee’s proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 20123 to 2022. According to the Republican Study Committee, “The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), Gulf of Mexico, and Rocky Mountains represent several areas in the United States that have resources that would help reduce our reliance on the Middle East, lower gas prices, create jobs, and boost our national security by increasing domestic production. Beginning in FY 2012, these areas would be open to oil and natural gas production, generating taxpayers $5 billion in auction proceeds over ten years. This budget calls for a policy that green-lights the Keystone pipeline and opens federal lands to oil and natural gas production, generating taxpayers at least $4.3 billion in auction proceeds over ten years” The vote was on an amendment to the House budget resolution replacing the entire budget with the RSC’s proposed budget; the amendment failed by a vote of 136 to 285. [House Vote 149, 3/29/12; Republican Study Committee, March 2012; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1003; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 112]
2012: Scott Voted To Open The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) For Oil And Gas Exploration. In February 2012, Scott voted for a bill which according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “open[ed] up a portion of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration and production and expand[ed] lease sales to include areas off the coast of southern California, the eastern and central Gulf of Mexico and Virginia coastline and near Bristol Bay, Alaska. The bill also would [have] provide[d] for approval of the 1,700-mile Canadian tar sands Keystone XL pipeline and shift[ed] permitting authority for the project from the State Department to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 237 to 187. No subsequent action was taken. [House Vote 71, 2/16/12; Congressional Actions, 1/3/13; Congressional Quarterly, 2/16/12; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3408]
2017: Scott Voted For The Final Version Of Trump’s Tax Reform Plan. In December 2017, Scott voted for the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, also known as Trump’s tax reform bill. The vote was on a motion to recede from the Senate version of the bill and agree concur with a further amendment, essentially on passage. The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 51 to 48. The House later agreed to the modified version of the bill. President Trump signed the bill into law. [Senate Vote 323, 12/20/17; Congressional Quarterly, 12/18/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
The Legislation Opened Up Parts Of ANWR To Drilling. According to Congressional Quarterly, “Passage of the bill, as amended, that would revise the federal income tax system by lowering individual and corporate tax rates, repealing various deductions through 2025, specifically by eliminating the deduction for state and local income taxes through 2025, increasing the deduction for pass-through entities and raising the child tax credit through 2025. It would also open parts of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling.” [Congressional Quarterly, 12/2/17]
2012: Scott Voted To Require Oil And Gas Leases In The National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska. In June 2012 Scott voted for a bill that, according to the Office of Speaker John Boehner, included “The National Petroleum Reserve Alaska Access Act (H.R. 2150), introduced by Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) will create jobs and help lower energy costs by ensuring that resources in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPRA) ‘are developed and transported in a timely, efficient manner.’” The bill passed by a vote of 248 to 163. No substantive action was taken in the Senate. [House Vote 410, 6/21/12; Office of Speaker John Boehner, 6/18/12; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4480]
Scott: “Taxing Oil Companies Is Not The Solution.” According to a tweet from Senator Scott’s official account, “Taxing oil companies is not the solution. President Biden, unleash American oil and stop being dependent on dictators to provide for us!” [Twitter, @SenatorTimScott, 11/8/22]
2016: Scott Voted Against Phasing Out Tax Credits That Specifically Benefit The Fossil Fuel Industry. In February 2016, Scott voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “phase[d] out tax credits for fossil fuels, including the deduction on intangible drilling costs, the domestic manufacturing deduction, the amortization of geological and geophysical expenditures, the percentage depletion for oil shale, and the capital gains treatment for royalties of coal.” The underlying legislation was the substitute amendment that would have reformed energy policy. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 45 to 50. [Senate Vote 14, 2/2/16; Congressional Quarterly, 2/2/16; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 3176; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2953; Congressional Actions, S. 2012]
2021: Scott Voted For An Amendment That Would Prohibit The Agriculture Department From Making Fossil Fuel-Burning Power Plants Ineligible For Financing. In August 2021, Scott voted for an amendment which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “create a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation related to agriculture policy, including to prohibit or limit the Agriculture Department from making the construction, maintenance or improvement of fossil fuel-burning power plants ineligible for financing.” The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The Senate adopted the amendment by a vote of 53-46. [Senate Vote 330, 8/10/21; Congressional Quarterly, 8/10/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 3103; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res.14]
2012: Scott Voted Against The FY 2013 Democratic Budget, Which Ended Tax Subsidies For Oil and Gas Companies. In March 2012, Scott voted to oppose ending tax subsidies for oil and gas companies as part of the Democrats’ proposed budget resolution covering FY 2013 to 2022. According to Budget Committee Democrats, “The Democratic resolution end s tax subsidies for the major integrated oil and gas companies – the five largest oil companies together earned more than $1 trillion in profits during the last decade and don’t need these tax breaks.” The vote was on an amendment to the House budget resolution replacing the entire budget with the House Democrats’ proposed budget; the amendment failed by a vote of 163 to 252. [House Vote 150, 3/29/12; House Budget Committee Democrats, 3/28/12; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1004; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 112]
2017: Scott Voted To Disapprove The Cardin-Lugar Rule, Which Required That Oil, Gas, And Mineral Extraction Public Companies Publish Payments To Foreign Countries Where They Operate. In February 2017, Scott voted for disapproving the Cardin-Lugar Rule via the Congressional Review Act. According to Congressional Quarterly, “This resolution disapproves the rule issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on July 27, 2016, known as the Disclosure of Payments by Resource Extraction Issuers Rule, that requires resource extraction issuers to provide detailed, public reporting of all payments to governments that equal or exceed $100,000 per project annually.” The vote was on the resolution. The Senate agreed to the resolution by a vote of 52 to 47. The House had already passed the resolution. The president later signed the legislation into law. [Senate Vote 51, 2/3/17; Congressional Quarterly, 1/27/17; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 41]
Scott Called For The End To The Biden Administration Electric Vehicle Policy. According to Senator Scott’s website, “Yesterday, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) joined a bipartisan, bicameral letter to President Joe Biden and Director of the Office of Management and Budget Shalanda Young urging the Biden administration to withdraw the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed rule that would require 67% of new light-duty vehicles, such as sedans, sport utility vehicles, and minivans, and 46% of medium-duty vehicles, including many shuttle buses, box trucks, and ambulances, to be electric by 2032. This rule amounts to a de facto mandate for electric vehicles (EVs) and phase-out of the internal combustion engine vehicle, which limits choice for South Carolinians, for whom an EV may not be financially feasible or practical.” [Senator Scott’s website, 2/23/24]
2011: Scott Voted To Eliminate A Program That Subsidized Fuel-Efficient Vehicle Development. In July 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] eliminate[d] the $6 million in funding for the Advanced Technology [sic: Vehicles] Manufacturing loan program and transferr[ed] the funds to the [underlying] bill's spending reduction account.” The vote was on an amendment to the House’s version of the Energy-Water Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2012; the House rejected the amendment by a vote of 114 to 309. [House Vote 580, 7/14/11; Congressional Quarterly, 7/14/11; Congressional Record, 7/13/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 646; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2354]
2012: Scott Voted To Create 14 Additional Offshore Drilling Leases. In July 2012, Scott voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have]replace[d] the Interior Department’s current offshore oil and gas drilling plan with one that would establish a timeline for 29 specific leases, up from the current 15. Certain leases would [have] be[en] conducted under a 2009 draft regulation rather than the 2012 plan. The bill also would [have] require[d] the Interior Department to prepare a multilease environmental impact statement for any leases required under the bill not in the June 2012 plan.” The House passed the bill in a vote of 253 to 170. The Senate took no substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 511, 7/25/12; Congressional Quarterly, 7/25/12; Congressional Actions, H.R. 6082]
2011: Scott Voted To Require The Interior Department To Expedite Offshore Drilling Permit Requests By Acting On Them Within 60 Days Of Application. In May 2011, Scott voted for legislation that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “modif[ied] the permitting process for lessees in the Gulf of Mexico seeking to initiate exploratory drilling. It would provide the Interior Department 30 days to approve such permits, with the option of extending reviews by two 15-day periods. If the department d[id] not issue a ruling on an application within 60 days, it would be deemed approved. The measure also would limit and expedite the process for filing a civil action in response to an approved drilling permit.” The House agreed to the bill by a vote of 263 to 163. The legislation was received in the Senate and no further action was taken. [House Vote 309, 5/11/11; Congressional Quarterly, 5/11/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1229]
2011: Scott Voted To Expand The Area Available For Outer Continental Shelf Oil And Natural Gas Drilling. In May 2011, Scott voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “require[d] the Interior Department to expand the area of the outer continental shelf that is available for oil and natural gas drilling, and set a national goal for domestic oil and gas production in its five-year leasing plan.” The vote was on passage of the bill; the House passed the bill by a vote of 243 to 179. The Senate took no substantive action. [House Vote 320, 5/12/11; Congressional Quarterly, 5/12/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1231]
2011: Scott Voted To Force The Obama Administration To Accelerate Oil Lease Sales In The Gulf Of Mexico And Off The Coast Of Virginia. In May 2011, Scott voted for legislation that, according to the New York Times, would have “force[d] the Obama administration to accelerate oil lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico and off the coast of Virginia. […] The bill would [have] reinstate[d] auctions for the right to drill offshore, which have been pushed back by the administration to allow more time for environmental and safety reviews.” The House agreed to the bill by a vote of 266 to 149. The Senate took no substantial action on the bill. [House Vote 298, 5/5/11; New York Times, 5/5/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1230]
2011: Scott Voted To Forbid EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board From Reviewing Or Blocking Any Permits For Offshore Drilling Along The Arctic Coast. In February 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] prohibit[ed] any appropriated funds from being used by the Environmental Appeals Board to review, reject or otherwise invalidate under the Clean Air Act any permits issued for offshore drilling along the Arctic coast.” The vote was on agreeing to the amendment to the proposed Full Year Continuing Appropriations Act for 2011. The House adopted the amendment by a vote of 243 to 185. The House subsequently passed the underlying bill; however, it was rejected in the Senate. [House Vote 94, 2/18/11; Congressional Quarterly, 2/18/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 96; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
Scott Introduced Legislation Which Would Remove Barriers To Offshore Drilling. According to The Herald, “U.S. Sen. Tim Scott has introduced a Southern Energy Access Jobs Act, which would open the door to drilling. Fellow Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who used to oppose drilling off the state’s coastline, has switched positions, saying he believes the oil and natural gas can help America gain energy independence. U.S. Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., also has a bill in the House to open waters for drilling. And Gov. Nikki Haley is a leading proponent for offshore drilling in the Atlantic.” [The Herald, 4/29/14]
Scott Touted Southern Energy Access Jobs Act Which Would Allow Southern States To Increase Offshore Drilling Efforts. According to a press release from Senator Scott, “U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) today announced the third piece of his Opportunity Agenda with the introduction of the Southern Energy Access Jobs Act (SEA Jobs Act). The bill will reverse the Obama Administration's moratorium on offshore Atlantic energy production and increase responsible offshore energy production in South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Virginia and creates one single ‘South Atlantic’ offshore energy planning area.” [Tim Scott, Press Release, 4/2/14]
2012: Scott Voted Against Requiring Safety Improvements On New Offshore Drilling Leases. In July 2012, Scott voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] require[d] leases offered under the bill to include new safety requirements, such as third-party verification of safety systems, blowout preventer performance standards and implement[ed] technologies that would limit the risk of hydrocarbon ignition.” The underlying bill pertained to expanded offshore drilling. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 189 to 232. [House Vote 506, 7/25/12; Congressional Quarterly, 7/25/12; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1443; Congressional Actions, H.R. 6082]
2011: Scott Voted Against Implementing The Safety Reforms Recommended By The Independent Commission That Investigated The Causes Of The BP Oil Spill, Including Minimum Requirements For Blowout Preventers, Well Design And Cementing. In May 2011, Scott voted against an amendment that would have, according to the League of Conservation Voters, “implement[ed] basic offshore drilling safety reforms recommended by the independent commission tasked with investigating the causes of the 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill and recommending oversight reforms. The amendment would [have] result[ed] in common-sense reforms that still have not been codified into law following the greatest environmental disaster in our nation's history.” In addition, according to Congressional Quarterly, “require[ed] the Interior Department to ensure that proposed drilling operations meet certain safety and environmental requirements before drilling permits are issued. Such regulations would have [had] to include minimum performance standards, third-party review and minimum requirements for blowout preventers, well design and cementing. It also would [have] require[d] public disclosure of rule making regarding safety and oil spill prevention.” The underlying legislation would have expedited offshore drilling permit requests. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 176 to 237. [House Vote 301, 5/10/11; League of Conservation Voters, 2011 Scorecard Vote; Congressional Quarterly, 5/10/11; Congressional Quarterly, 5/11/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 272; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1229]
2011: Scott Voted To Limit EPA Review Of Air Pollution From Proposed Offshore Drilling Projects. In June 2011, Scott voted for legislation that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] set a six-month deadline for the EPA to take final action on air pollution permit applications for outer continental shelf exploration. It would [have] strip[ed] the ability of the Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) to remand or deny the issuance of such permits. It also would [have] modif[ied] air quality standards so that impacts are determined solely with respect to the impact in the corresponding onshore area.” The House agreed to the bill by a vote of 253 to 166. The legislation was received in the Senate and no further action was taken. [House Vote 478, 6/22/11; Congressional Quarterly, 6/22/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2021]
2016: Scott Voted Against Increasing Authorizing Funding For The Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E). In January 2016, Scott voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “increase[d] proposed authorization levels for the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E).” The underlying legislation was the substitute amendment that would have reformed energy policy. The Senate agreed to the amendment by a vote of 55 to 37. The Senate later passed the underlying bill, but the House and Senate were not able to resolve the differences between the bills. [Senate Vote 9, 1/28/16; Congressional Quarterly, 1/28/16; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2965; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2953; Congressional Actions, S. 2012]
2013: Scott Voted For Cutting Funding For Research And Development Of Alternative Energy Sources As Part Of The FY 2014 Ryan Budget. In March 2013, Scott voted for cutting funding for research and development of alternative energy sources, as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to the House Budget Committee, “The budget provides sufficient funding for essential projects, like energy security and basic research and development. But it pares back spending in areas of duplication and non-core functions, like applied and commercial research and development projects best left to the private sector.” The vote was on the House Republicans’ fiscal year 2014 budget resolution, which Senate Budget Committee chairwoman Patty Murray offered as a substitute amendment to the Senate’s fiscal year 2014 budget resolution. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 40 to 59. [Senate Vote 46, 3/21/13; House Budget Committee, 3/12/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 433; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 8]
2011: Scott Voted To Bar Funds For The Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy. In July 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “bar[red] the use of funds in the bill for the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E).” The underlying legislation was the FY 2012 Energy and Water appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 81 to 341. [House Vote 587, 7/15/11; Congressional Quarterly, 7/15/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 663; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2354]
2011: Scott Voted Against Increasing Funding For the Advanced Research Projects Agency At The Energy Department At The Expense Of Fossil Energy Research. In February 2011, Scott voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] increase[d] funding for the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) at the Energy Department by $20 million and decrease[d] funding for fossil energy research and development at the department by an equal amount.” The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 159 to 273. [House Vote 56, 2/16/11; Congressional Quarterly, 2/16/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 32; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
2015: Scott Voted Against Extending The Solar Tax Credit As Part Of The FY 2016 Omnibus. In December 2015, Scott voted against extending the solar tax credit. According to Congressional Quarterly, the bill “extend[ed] and phase[ed] out the 30% solar energy credit, which is set to expire at the end of 2016, by extending the credit with respect to property for which construction began before the end of 2021. JCT estimates this extension would cost $5 billion over 10 years.” The legislation was, according to Congressional Quarterly, a FY 2016 Omnibus Appropriations bill. The vote was on a motion to concur in the House Amendments to the Senate Amendments to H.R. 2029. The Senate agreed to the motion by a vote of 65 to 33. The House having already passed the legislation, the president then signed it. [Senate Vote 339, 12/18/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/18/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/15/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/17/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2029]
2016: Scott Voted Against Increasing Wind Energy Funding By $15 Million. In April 2016, Scott voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “provide[d] $95 million for wind energy from within Energy Department energy efficiency and renewable energy funding, a $15 million increase above the level in a related committee report.” The underlying legislation was the FY 2017 Water and Energy appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The Senate adopted the amendment by a vote of 54 to 42. The Senate later passed the underlying bill, but it was turned into a continuing resolution. [Senate Vote 61, 4/26/16; Congressional Quarterly, 4/26/16; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 3812; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 3801; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2028]
2015: Scott Voted Against Extending The Wind Tax Credit As Part Of The FY 2016 Omnibus. In December 2015, Scott voted against funding the NIH at an increased level. According to Congressional Quarterly, the bill would have “extend[ed] the production tax credit for wind energy facilities for which construction began before the end of 2019, as well as election to treat qualified facilities as energy property that is eligible for the investment credit. JCT estimates this extension would cost $14.5 billion over 10 years.” The legislation was, according to Congressional Quarterly, a FY 2016 Omnibus Appropriations bill. The vote was on a motion to concur in the House Amendments to the Senate Amendments to H.R. 2029. The Senate agreed to the motion by a vote of 65 to 33. The House having already passed the legislation, the president then signed it. [Senate Vote 339, 12/18/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/18/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/15/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/17/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2029]
2013: Tim Scott Voted To Cut $60 Million In Advanced Biofuel Funding From The Defense Department’s Budget. In March 2013, Tim Scott voted for an amendment that would have, according to the League of Conservation Voters, “strip]ped] $60 million in funding for advanced biofuels from the DOD budget. The amendment sought to reassign funding for advanced drop-in biofuel production to cover other military operations and expenses.” The underlying legislation was an FY 2013 continuing resolution. The vote was on the amendment. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 40 to 59. [Senate Vote 41, 3/20/13; League of Conservation Voters, 2013 Scorecard Vote; Congressional Quarterly, 3/20/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 115; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 26; Congressional Actions, H.R. 933]
2012: Scott Voted To Cut Funding For Research And Development Of Alternative Energy Sources As Part Of The FY 2013 Ryan Budget. In March 2012, Scott voted to cut funding for research and development of alternative energy sources, as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2013 to 2022. According to the House Budget Committee, “This budget would continue funding essential government missions, including energy security and basic research and development, while paring back duplicative spending and non-core functions, such as applied and commercial research or development projects best left to the private sector. And it would immediately terminate all programs that allow government to play venture capitalist with taxpayers’ money.” The vote was on passage; the resolution passed by a vote of 228 to 191. The Senate later rejected a motion to proceed to consider the House-passed budget resolution. [House Vote 151, 3/16/12; House Budget Committee, 5/20/12; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 112]
2011: Scott Voted For FY 2012 Ryan Budget, Which Cut Funding For Research And Development Of Alternative Energy Sources. In April 2011, Scott voted for cutting funding for research and development of alternative energy sources, as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2012 to 2021. According to the House Budget Committee, “This budget would continue funding essential government missions, including energy security and basic research and development, while paring back duplicative spending and non-core functions, such as applied and commercial research or development projects best left to the private sector. This budget would continue funding essential government missions, including energy security and basic research and development, while paring back spending in areas of duplication or non-core functions, such as applied and commercial research or development projects best left to the private sector. Ultimately, the best energy policy is one that encourages robust competition and innovation to ensure the American people an affordable and stable supply of energy. This budget would roll back federal intervention and expensive corporate-welfare funding directed to the president’s allied industries.” The vote was on passage; the resolution passed by a vote of 235 to 193. [House Vote 277, 4/15/11; House Budget Committee, 4/5/11; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 34]
2016: Scott Voted Against An Energy Policy Bill That Would Have, In Part, Raised Energy Efficiency Standards For Federal And Commercial Buildings. In April 2016, Scott voted against a bill that overhauled U.S. energy policy. According to Congressional Quarterly, “[p]assage of the bill that would require the Energy secretary to conduct an electric grid energy storage research program and create a grant program for projects related to modernization of the electric grid, contain provisions related to energy efficiency and applications to export liquefied natural gas, and permanently reauthorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund. As amended, it would give the Department of Energy flexibility to decide when it will sell portions of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. As amended, it also would require the secretary of Housing and Urban Development to issue guidelines for the Federal Housing Administration to implement enhanced loan eligibility requirements in the mortgage underwriting process that account for the expected energy costs savings for a loan applicant.” In addition, also according to Congressional Quarterly, “The bill (S 2012) is the first broad energy policy bill passed by the Senate since 2007. It provides for modest policy changes that could win bipartisan support, including streamlining the permitting for liquefied natural gas exports, mandating improvements to the electric grid’s reliability and security, raising energy efficiency standards for commercial and federal buildings, and permanently reauthorizing the Land and Water Conservation Fund.” The vote was on passage. The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 85 to 12. The House later passed an amended version of the bill but a final conference report was never agreed upon. [Senate Vote 54, 4/20/16; Congressional Quarterly, 4/20/16; Congressional Quarterly, 4/20/16; Congressional Actions, S. 2012]
2016: Scott Voted Against Creating A National Energy Efficiency Standard. In February 2016, Scott voted against an amendment that would create national energy efficiency standards. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have “require[d] retail electricity and natural gas suppliers to submit reports to the [S]ecretary of Energy demonstrating achievement of cumulative savings, and would require the secretary to establish standards for cost-effective energy savings, opportunities for new codes and standard savings, and technology improvements. The amendment would [have] further require[d] retail electricity and natural gas suppliers to comply with performance standards.” The underlying legislation was the substitute amendment that would have reformed energy policy. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 43 to 52. [Senate Vote 11, 2/2/16; Congressional Quarterly, 2/2/16; Sen. Franken Press Release, 2/2/16; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 3115; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2953; Congressional Actions, S. 2012]
2011: Scott Voted To Block Further Federal Funding For The Weatherization Assistance Program Or For The State Energy Program. In February 2011, Scott voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] str[uck] a provision in the bill that would bar funds provided for energy efficiency and renewable-energy programs at the Energy Department from being used for the Weatherization Assistance Program or the State Energy Program.” The House rejected the amendment to the proposed omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2011 by a vote of 208 to 223. [House Vote 57, 2/16/11; Congressional Quarterly, 2/16/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 35; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
2015: Scott Voted To Approve The Keystone XL Pipeline’s Construction, Operation, And Future Maintenance. In January 2015, Scott voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “[would have] immediately authorize[d] the construction, operation and maintenance of the Keystone XL pipeline — including the pipeline itself and cross-border facilities as described in TransCanada’s 2012 application, and any revisions to the pipeline route within Nebraska as required or authorized by the state. Under the measure, the January 2014 environmental impact statement issued by the State Department would be considered sufficient to satisfy all requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act.” The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 62 to 36. The House subsequently approved it as well, but the legislation died after the president successfully vetoed it. [Senate Vote 49, 1/29/15; Congressional Quarterly, 2/6/15; Congressional Actions, S. 1]
2014: Scott Voted To Approve The Keystone XL Pipeline. In November 2014, Scott voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] immediately allow[ed] TransCanada to construct, connect, operate and maintain the pipeline and cross-border facilities known as the Keystone XL pipeline, including any revision to the pipeline route within Nebraska as required or authorized by the state. The 2014 environmental impact statement issued by the State Department would [have] be[en] declared sufficient to satisfy all requirements for review under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act. It would [have] grant[ed] the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia exclusive jurisdiction regarding legal disputes over the pipeline or the constitutionality of the bill.” Operating under an agreement requiring 60 votes for the bill to pass, the Senate rejected the bill by a vote of 59 to 41. [Senate Vote 280, 11/18/14; Congressional Quarterly, 11/18/14; Congressional Actions, S. 2280]
2013: Scott Voted To Approve The Keystone XL Pipeline, As Part Of Senator Rand Paul’s Proposed Budget. In March 2013, Scott voted for approving the Keystone XL Pipeline, as part of Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2013 to 2023. According to a press release from Sen. Paul, his budget resolution includes a provision that “[a]pprove[s] the Keystone XL pipeline.” The vote was on an amendment to the Senate budget resolution replacing the entire budget with Paul’s proposed budget; the Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 18 to 81. [Senate Vote 69, 3/22/13; Senator Rand Paul press release, 3/22/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 263; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 8]
2012: Scott Voted To Try To Force Federal Approval Of The Keystone XL Pipeline Within Thirty Days. In May 2012, Scott voted for provisions in a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “transfer[ed] authority to approve the Keystone XL pipeline project from the State Department to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and provide that if FERC does not approve the pipeline within 30 days that it be deemed approved.” The vote was on a motion to instruct House conferees to insist on the Keystone XL provisions in the House-passed surface transportation authorization bill; the House adopted the motion by a vote of 261 to 152. The provisions were not, however, included in the conference report produced by the conference committee. [House Vote 292, 5/18/12; Congressional Quarterly, 5/18/12; House Report 112-557, 6/28/12; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4348]
2012: Scott Voted To Require The Federal Government To Issue Permits For Keystone XL Pipeline Within 30 Days As A Rider On Transportation Appropriations Bill. In April 2012, Scott voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “extend[ed] the authorization for surface transportation programs, including federal aid highway, mass transit and safety programs, for three months through Sept. 30, 2012. It also would [have] extend[ed] the authority to spend money from the Highway Trust Fund through the same period. It would [have] transfer[ed] authority to approve the Keystone XL pipeline project from the State Department to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission which would [have] be[en] required to issue the permit within 30 days of receiving an application. As amended, the bill would [have] ease[d] federal environmental permitting requirements for highway construction projects and provide[d] states with more authority over environmental reviews.” The House agreed to the bill by a vote of 293 to 127. The legislation went to a conference committee where significant changes were made. The legislation was then passed by both the House and Senate and was signed by the president into law. [House Vote 170, 4/18/12; CQ Floor Votes, 4/18/12; Congressional Actions, H.R.4348]
2012: Scott Voted To Approve The Keystone XL Pipeline. In February 2012, Scott voted for a bill which according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “open[ed] up a portion of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration and production and expand[ed] lease sales to include areas off the coast of southern California, the eastern and central Gulf of Mexico and Virginia coastline and near Bristol Bay, Alaska. The bill also would [have] provide[d] for approval of the 1,700-mile Canadian tar sands Keystone XL pipeline and shift[ed] permitting authority for the project from the State Department to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 237 to 187. No subsequent action was taken. [House Vote 71, 2/16/12; Congressional Actions, 1/3/13; Congressional Quarterly, 2/16/12; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3408]
2011: Scott Voted To Require The President To Approve The Keystone XL Pipeline Within 60 Days Of The Bill’s Enactment. In December 2011, Scott voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “require[d] the president to approve the Keystone XL pipeline permit application within 60 days of the bill’s enactment unless it is determined that the pipeline is not in the national interest.” The bill also would have extended other programs, including the pay roll tax and unemployment, and made changes to programs including Fannie and Freddie loans and Medicare doctor payments, and approved the Keystone XL pipeline. The vote was on passage of the bill; the House passed the bill by a vote of 234 to 193. The bill was extensively amended by the Senate and was sent to conference. The House subsequently approved the conference report and the president signed it into law. [House Vote 923, 12/13/11; Congressional Quarterly, 12/13/11; House Report 112-399, 2/16/12; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3630]
2021: Scott Effectively Voted For An Amendment That Would Reverse The President’s Executive Order Terminating The Keystone XL Pipeline Permit, And Would Require The President To Approve The Keystone XL Pipeline Project If The Project Would Create Jobs And Increase Tax Revenues. In March 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Scott voted for the “motion to waive all applicable sections of the Congressional Budget Act with respect to the Sanders, I-Vt., point of order that the Tester amendment no. 1197 to the Schumer, D-N.Y., substitute amendment no. 891 to the bill violates section 313(b)(1)(d) of the Congressional Budget Act. The amendment would require the president, within 60 days of the bill's enactment, to review and approve a permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, if the president determines that the project would create construction jobs and increase tax revenues in communities that have been economically impacted by COVID-19. It would nullify the January 2021 executive order revoking the permit.” The vote was on a motion to waive. The Senate failed to acquire a 3/5 majority and rejected the motion by a vote of 51-48. [Senate Vote 83, 3/6/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/6/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 1197; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 891; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1319]
2012: Scott Effectively Voted To Approve The Keystone XL Pipeline. In March 2012, Scott effectively voted to support approving the Keystone XL Pipeline, the Republican Study Committee’s proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2013 to 2022. According to the Republican Study Committee, “This budget calls for a policy that green-lights the Keystone pipeline.” The vote was on an amendment to the House budget resolution replacing the entire budget with the RSC’s proposed budget; the amendment failed by a vote of 136 to 285. [House Vote 149, 3/29/12; Republican Study Committee, March 2012; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1003; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 112]
Scott Said He Would Approve The Permit For The Keystone Pipeline If Elected President. According to CNN, “Scott says in his plan he will encourage domestic fuel production and undo Biden administration policies and executive actions on energy – including approving the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline and increasing oil and gas development on federal lands.” [CNN, 9/14/23]
Scott Called For The U.S. To “Restart The Conversation About The Keystone XL Pipeline.” According to Fox News, “’So the truth is that what we need is to restart the conversation about the Keystone XL pipeline to introduce confidence into the marketplace,’ he said, as Biden ended the project with the stroke of a pen his first day in office.” [Fox News, 6/21/22]
2015: Scott Voted To Oppose Requiring Oil Transported By The Keystone XL Pipeline To Be Considered Crude Oil For Tax Purposes. In February 2015, Scott voted against requiring oil transported by the Keystone XL pipeline to be considered crude oil. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would have “express[ed] the sense of the Senate that Congress should approve a bill to ensure that all forms of bitumen or synthetic crude oil, also known as tar sands, are subject to the excise tax associated with the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. It would also [have] express that it is necessary for Congress to approve a bill because in 2011 the IRS determined that certain petroleum is not subject to the excise tax. It would urge the House of Representatives to consider and refer legislation to the Senate clarifying that all forms of bitumen or synthetic crude oil are subject to the excise tax.” The underling legislation was a bill that would have immediately approved the Keystone XL pipeline. The Senate agreed to the amendment by a vote of 75 to 23. The Congress later passed the legislation, but the president vetoed. The veto was not overridden. [Senate Vote 18, 1/22/15; Congressional Quarterly, 1/22/15; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 123; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 2; Congressional Actions, S. 1]
2013: Scott Effectively Voted To Weaken The EPA’s Mercury And Air Toxic Standards. In March 2013, Scott voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “establish[ed] a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation regarding executive branch decisions to issue presidential exemptions from EPA's hazardous air toxins standards, including mercury, as long as the legislation’s costs are offset without raising new revenue.” The underlying legislation was an FY 2014 budget resolution. The vote was on the amendment. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 46 to 53. [Senate Vote 72, 3/22/13; Congressional Quarterly, 3/22/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 514; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 8]
2011: Scott Voted To Prohibit The EPA From Reducing Mercury Emissions And Other Air Pollutants From Cement Manufacturers. In February 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “bar[red] the use of funds made available in the bill to implement, administer or enforce an EPA rule that would [have] require[d] cement manufacturers to reduce mercury emissions, particle pollution and other air pollutants.” The underlying bill pertained to continuing appropriations for FY 2011. The vote was on adopting the amendment; the House adopted the amendment by a vote of 250 to 177. The House passed the underlying bill and the Senate amended the bill, but it was not taken up by the House again. [House Vote 86, 2/17/11; Congressional Quarterly, 2/17/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 88; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
2011: Scott Voted For A Bill That Would Loosen Federal Restrictions On Cross-State Air Pollution And Weaken EPA Authority To Regulate Air Pollution Effects On Downwind States. In September 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have “delay[ed], until at least 2015, the promulgation of federal cross-state air pollution rules, and require[d] states to wait at least an additional three years to implement them. The amendment also would [have] prohibit[ed] EPA from using modeled data to determine the impact of pollution on downwind states. It would [have] delay[ed] air toxics standards for utilities until at least 2013 and would require giving power plants at least five years to comply with the rules once they are issued.” The vote was on agreeing to the amendment; the House adopted the amendment by a vote of 234 to 188. The House passed the underlying bill, but the Senate took no substantive action. [House Vote 737, 9/23/11; Congressional Quarterly, 9/23/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 799; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2401]
2011: Scott Effectively Voted To Eliminate The Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Air Act Authority To Regulate Air Pollution. In April 2011, Scott voted against a motion to recommit a bill with instructions that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have sent “the bill to the House Energy and Commerce Committee with instructions that it be reported back immediately with an amendment that would add a section to the bill specifying that nothing in the bill would limit the authority of the EPA administrator under the Clean Air Act to protect the health of children and seniors, including children with asthma and lung diseases, from the effects of air pollution by large sources of carbon dioxide.” The House rejected the motion by a vote of 175 to 251. The House passed the underlying bill and the bill was sent to the Senate, but no further action was taken. [House Vote 248, 4/7/11; Congressional Quarterly, 4/7/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 910]
2011: Tim Scott Voted To Bar The Use Of Funds To Modify Air Quality Standards Stipulated By The Clean Air Act. In February 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have, “bar[red] the use of funds made available in the [underlying] bill to modify the national primary ambient air quality standard or the national secondary ambient air quality standard applicable to coarse particulate matter under the Clean Air Act.” The underlying bill pertained to continuing appropriations for FY 2011. The House adopted the amendment by a vote of 255 to 168. The House passed the underlying bill and the Senate amended the bill, but it was not taken up by the House again. [House Vote 140, 2/19/11; Congressional Quarterly, 2/19/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 164; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
Scott Opposed The Biden Administration’s Clean Power Plan. According to a press release from Senator Scott, “Today, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) joined Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, and 37 of their Senate colleagues in urging Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan to withdraw the unlawful ‘Clean Power Plan 2.0.’ The plan effectively shuts down affordable and reliable energy, intensifying the energy shortage the United States is already facing. ‘The EPA has again grossly misinterpreted the scope of authority Congress granted under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act by proposing a rule that would require generation shifting and transform our nation’s power sector with neither a clear and explicit congressional authorization nor adequate process as required under the Administrative Procedure Act,’ the senators wrote.” [Senator Scott, Press Release, 8/1/23]
2024: Scott Introduced A Resolution Of Disapproval Over A EPA Rule On Emissions Requirements For Coal And Gas Fired Power Plants. According to a press release from Senator Tim Scott’s office, “U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) joined Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee Ranking Member Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and 42 of their Senate colleagues in introducing a formal challenge to the Biden administration’s regulations intended to shut down American power plants through a Congressional Review Act (CRA) joint resolution of disapproval. The resolution comes after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its final rules that imposes unrealistic emissions requirements on existing coal-fired power plants and newly constructed gas-fired power plants. This attempt to force the closure of power plants that supply America’s baseload electricity was previously tried under President Obama and overturned by the Supreme Court in West Virginia v. EPA. ‘The Biden administration is committed to dismantling America’s energy sector. They’re willing to drive up costs for Americans and send thousands to the unemployment line all because they’re beholden to a radical, far-left base,’ said Senator Scott. ‘I’m proud to join my colleagues in standing up for our nation’s economy, energy independence, and the livelihoods of hardworking Americans.’” [Senator Scott, Press Release, 6/11/24]
2015: Scott Voted To Nullify The EPA’s Carbon Emissions Rule For New And Modified Power Plants. In November 2015, Scott voted for nullifying the EPA’s carbon emissions rule for new and modified power plants. According to Congressional Quarterly, the joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval would have “disapprove[d] of and nullify the Environmental Protection Agency carbon emissions rule for new and modified power plants.” The vote was on the joint resolution. The Senate agreed to the joint resolution by a vote of 52 to 46. The House has yet to act on the joint resolution. The bill was later passed by the House, which was successfully vetoed by the president. [Senate Vote 307, 11/17/15; Congressional Quarterly, 11/17/15; Congressional Actions, S. J. Res. 23]
2019: Scott Effectively Voted For The EPA’s Repeal Of The Clean Power Plan. In October 2019, Scott voted against a joint resolution that would disapprove of the EPA’s repeal of the Clean Power Plan. According to Congressional Quarterly, the vote would “express disapproval of the Environmental Protection Agency’s July 2019 rule that would repeal the Clean Power Plan and finalize the Affordable Clean Energy rule. Under the measure, the July rule would have no force or effect.” The vote was on passage of a joint resolution. The Senate rejected the joint resolution by a vote of 41-53. [Senate Vote 324, 10/17/19; Congressional Quarterly, 10/17/19; Congressional Actions, S.J.Res.53]
2011: Scott Voted To Bar EPA From Implementing Or Enforcing Regulations Regarding The Emission Of Greenhouse Gases From Stationary Sources, Such As Power Plants. In February 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] prohibit[ed] the use of any appropriated funds by the EPA to implement or enforce any regulations applicable after Jan. 1, 2011, pertaining to the emission of greenhouse gases from stationary sources.” The House adopted the amendment to the proposed omnibus Continuing Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2011 by a vote of 249 to 177. The House subsequently passed the underlying bill, but the Senate rejected it. [House Vote 96, 2/18/11; Congressional Quarterly, 2/18/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 101; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
Scott Claimed That Halting LNG Exports Allowed Other Countries To Fill The Void. According to Scott via his Senate Twitter, “These are the real-world consequences of Joe Biden’s political agenda. Biden's decision to halt LNG exports weakens our national security and enables other countries to fill the void.” [Scott via Twitter, 2/27/24]
Scott Opposed The Moratorium On Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Exports. According to Scott via Twitter, “I’m fighting to safeguard our nation’s future by growing our energy economy. Reliance on foreign adversaries for energy is a threat to our economy and national security. Link to article: More than 150 Republicans take aim at Biden's moratorium on natural gas exports.” [Scott via Twitter, 2/8/24]
Scott Claimed That The Biden Administration’s Policy Was “Pandering.” According to Scott via his Senate Twitter, “Even the Washington Post knows the Biden administration’s assault on American energy is nothing more than shameless pandering to far-left activists. I’m fighting to pass legislation that ends these senseless games and puts our economy and national security first.” [Scott via Twitter, 1/31/24]
Scott Introduced A Bill To Remove The Department Of Energy’s Oversight Over Natural Gas Exports. According to Scott’s Senate Website, “Today, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) introduced the Unlocking Domestic LNG Potential Act, which depoliticizes the export of American liquefied natural gas (LNG) by eliminating the requirement for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to authorize its export and instead giving the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) sole authority over the approval process.” [Senator Scott’s Website, 1/31/24]
2021: Scott Voted For An Amendment That Would Prohibit The Council On Environmental Quality And The Environmental Protection Agency From Banning Fracking Practices. In August 2021, Scott voted for an amendment which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “create a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation related to the National Environmental Policy Act and other environmental laws and policies, including to limit or prohibit the Council on Environmental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing or implementing a rule or guidance that bans fracking in the United States.” The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The Senate adopted the amendment by a vote of 57-42. [Senate Vote 323, 8/10/21; Congressional Quarterly, 8/10/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 3105; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res.14]
2021: Scott Voted For An Amendment That Would Prohibit Implementing A Federal Carbon Tax. In February 2021, Scott voted for an amendment which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “create a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation related to federal tax law changes, including legislation to limit or prohibit the establishment of a federal tax on carbon emissions.” The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 50-50. [Senate Vote 46, 2/5/21; Congressional Quarterly, 2/5/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt 887; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res. 5]
2013: Scott Effectively Voted To Create A 60-Vote Point Of Order Against Legislation That Would Create A Carbon Tax. In March 2013, Scott effectively voted to create a point of against, according to Congressional Quarterly, “any legislation that includes a tax or fee on carbon emissions.” The underlying legislation was an FY 2014 budget resolution. The vote was on a motion to waive the Budget Act with respect to a point of order against the amendment. The Senate rejected the motion, effectively killing the amendment, by a vote of 53 to 46, where a three-fifths majority was needed for passage. [Senate Vote 59, 3/22/13; Congressional Quarterly, 3/22/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 261; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 8]
2013: Scott Effectively Voted To Eliminate The Department Of Energy, As Part Of Senator Rand Paul’s Proposed Budget. In March 2013, Scott effectively voted for eliminating the Department of Energy, as part of Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2013 to 2023. According to a press release from Sen. Paul, his budget resolution would have eliminated the Department of Energy. The vote was on an amendment to the Senate budget resolution replacing the entire budget with Paul’s proposed budget; the Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 18 to 81. [Senate Vote 69, 3/22/13; Senator Rand Paul Press Release, 3/22/13; Congressional Actions, S. Amdt. 263; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 8]
2019: Scott Voted Against The FY 2020 Minibus Appropriations Bill, Which Provided $38.6 Billion For The Energy Department. In December 2019, Scott voted against the FY 2020 minibus spending bill, which represented 8 of the 12 appropriations bills. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The bill provides a total of $38.6 billion for the Energy Department — $2.9 billion (8%) more than FY 2019 funding and $7.1 billion (22%) more than requested. Within the total provided for the department, almost half ($16.7 billion) is for nuclear weapons activities conducted by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and another $6.3 billion is for continued environmental cleanup of defense facilities where nuclear weapons activities were conducted. When including non-defense cleanup programs, the bill provides a total of $7.5 billion for environmental cleanup. It provides $7.0 billion for the Energy Department's science account — $415 million (6%) more than FY 2019 and $1.5 billion (26%) more than requested. The account funds the department's work on basic energy research, nuclear physics, biological and environmental sciences, fusion and other related endeavors. It rejects the administration's request to eliminate funding for the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) research program and instead provides $425 million ($59 million, or 16%, more than FY 2019). ARPA-E supports research and related projects attempting to rapidly develop energy technologies that are too risky to attract substantial private investment.” The vote was a motion to concur. The Senate agreed to the motion by a vote of 71-23, thereby sending the bill to the president, who signed it into law. [Senate Vote 415, 12/19/19; Congressional Quarterly, 12/17/19; Congressional Actions, H.R.1865]
2012: Scott Voted To Eliminate All Energy Department Funding For Energy Efficiency And Renewable Energy Programs. In June 2012, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] eliminate[d] all funding provided in the bill for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. The $1.5 billion total include[d] an appropriation of $115 million that would remain available through fiscal 2014. It would [have] transfer[ed] $1.5 billion to the bill's spending reduction account.” The underlying bill funded energy and water development appropriations for Fiscal Year 2013. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 113 to 275. [House Vote 311, 6/1/12; Congressional Quarterly, 6/1/12; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1178; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5325]
2011: Scott Voted To Eliminate Funding For Energy Efficiency And Renewable Programs In The FY 2012 Energy And Water Appropriations Bill. In July 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “eliminate[d] all funding for energy-efficiency and renewable-energy programs.” The underlying legislation was the FY 2012 Energy and Water appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 69 to 354. [House Vote 591, 7/15/11; Congressional Quarterly, 7/15/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 668; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2354]
2011: Scott Voted Against Increasing Funding Energy-Efficiency And Renewable Energy Programs By $10 Million Paid For By Reducing Funds For Energy Department Administrative Expenses. In July 2011, Scott voted against an amendment that, according to the Tulsa World, “would increase funding for solar energy research and development by $10 million and offset the increase by cutting funding for administration at the Department of Energy by $10 million.” The underlying bill pertained to energy and water appropriations. The amendment was adopted by the House by a vote of 212 to 210. The Senate replaced the bill with a substitute not including the language of the amendment. [House Vote 586, 7/15/11; Tulsa World, 7/24/11; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2354; H.R.2354, 7/18/11]
2011: Scott Voted To Cut Funding For Energy Efficiency And Renewable-Energy Programs By $70 Million. In February 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would [have] decrease[d] funding for energy efficiency and renewable-energy programs at the Energy Department by $70 million.” The vote was on agreeing to the amendment, which the House rejected by a vote of 137 to 293. [House Vote 58, 2/16/11; Congressional Quarterly, 2/16/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 36; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
2011: Scott Voted To Reduce The Department Of Energy’s Science Account By $820.5 Million. In July 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, “reduce[d] funding for the Energy Department science account by $820.5 million and transfer the money to the bill’s spending reduction account.” The underlying legislation was the FY 2012 Energy and Water appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 99 to 328. [House Vote 578, 7/14/11; Congressional Quarterly, 7/14/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 643; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2354]
2022: Scott Voted For An Amendment That Would Have Removed A $45 Million Appropriation To The Environmental Protection Agency For Activities Aimed At Reducing Greenhouse Gases. In August 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Scott voted for an amendment to the Inflation Reduction Act, which would “strike language appropriating $45 million to the EPA for activities related to greenhouse gases.” The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The Senate rejected the amendment by a vote of 50-50. [Senate Vote 293, 8/7/22; Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 5382; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt. 5194; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5376]
The Moore Capito Amendment Would Have Stricken $45 Million In Funding To The Environmental Protection Agency Meant To Implement Sections Of The Clean Air Act. According to Congressional Quarterly, “Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., to strike $45 million in funding for the EPA to implement eight sections of the Clean Air Act.” [Congressional Quarterly, 8/7/22]
2011: Scott Voted To Cut Funding, By $8 Million For The Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Registry. In February 2011, Scott voted for an amendment that would have, according to The Guardian, “cut $8.4m in funds to the EPA’s greenhouse gas registry.” According to the Sacramento Bee, the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Registry, “tracks carbon pollution from power plants and refineries.” The underlying bill pertained to continuing appropriations for FY 2011. The vote was on adopting the amendment; the House adopted the amendment by a vote of 239 to 185. The House passed the underlying bill and the Senate amended the bill, but it was not taken up by the House again. [House Vote 64, 2/16/11; The Guardian, 2/21/11; Sacramento Bee, 2/14/11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 47; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
Scott Criticized Biden’s WOTUS Rule And Called It Regulatory Overreach. According to the Post and Courier, “Scott recently issued a statement criticizing the new Environmental Protection Agency definition that expands what rivers, creeks and lakes the agency can regulate. ‘The Biden administration continues to create confusion and bureaucratic burdens for hard-working farmers and landowners in South Carolina and across the country,’ Scott said in a news release. He said the new rule would remove power from farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, homeowners and small business owners and put it in the hands of the EPA to regulate private waters. ‘With more wetlands than the majority of states, South Carolina stands to be disproportionately harmed by this regulatory overreach,’ Scott said. ‘I am hopeful the upcoming Supreme Court ruling will provide much-needed clarity and economic freedom.’” [Post And Courier, 1/11/23]
Scott Opposed The WOTUS Rule By Voting In Favor Of A Congressional Review Act Joint Resolution Of Disapproval. According to a press release from Senator Scott, “Today, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) challenged the Biden Administration’s Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule by voting in favor of a Congressional Review Act (CRA) joint resolution of disapproval.’” [Press Release, Senator Scott, 3/29/23]
Scott Criticized Biden For Vetoing The Congressional Review Act Which Opposed The WOTUS Rule. According to a tweet from Senator Scott, “By vetoing the WOTUS CRA passed by Congress, Biden is stripping power away from hardworking Americans and putting it in the hands of unelected bureaucrats at the EPA. Decisions impacting our farmers and landowners should be kept locally, not transferred to Washington.” [Twitter, @SenatorTimScott, 4/10/23]
2021: Scott Voted For An Amendment That Would Ensure The Effective Implementation Of Water Pollution Prevention And Uphold A Trump-Era Environmental Protection Agency Rule From April 2020 That Related To Navigable Waters. In February 2021, Scott voted for an amendment which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “create a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for legislation relating to federal environmental and water policies, including to ensure the ‘effective and efficient’ implementation of existing law related to water pollution prevention and control and to preserve an April 2020 Environmental Protection Agency rule related to federal regulatory jurisdiction over navigable waters.” The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The Senate adopted the amendment by a vote of 51-49. [Senate Vote 43, 2/5/21; Congressional Quarterly, 2/5/21; Congressional Actions, S.Amdt 655; Congressional Actions, S.Con.Res. 5]
A Federal Judge Rejected The Trump Administration’s Navigable Waters Rule. According to the Washington Post, “A federal judge Monday threw out a major Trump administration rule that scaled back federal protections for streams, marshes and wetlands across the United States, reversing one of the previous administration’s most significant environmental rollbacks.” [Washington Post, 8/30/21]
U.S. District Judge Rosemary Márquez: Trump’s Replacement Of The WOTUS Rule Could Lead To Serious Environmental Harm. According to the Washington Post, “U.S. District Judge Rosemary Márquez wrote that Trump officials committed serious errors while writing the regulation, finalized last year, and that leaving it in place could lead to ‘serious environmental harm.’” [Washington Post, 8/30/21]