Coverage window: 119th Congress (began Jan 3, 2025). This page includes scored votes that are directly relevant to forest management and permitting governance and that occurred during the 1st Session (2025). New votes will be appended as the 2nd Session proceeds.
Scoring House Leadership
- 4 points for each “Key Vote” aligned with the Forest Green position.
- 0 points for a vote against the FoGo PAC position, or “Not Voting.”
- Total score is presented as a percentage of points earned out of points possible in this scorecard version.
FoGo PAC positions used in this version
-
H.R. 471 – Fix Our Forests Act (House passage)
FoGo PAC position: YES
Rationale (short): supports accelerating targeted forest resilience work; FoGo PAC continues to track implementation details, safeguards, and community protections. -
H.R. 4776 – SPEED Act (House passage)
FoGo PAC position: NO
Rationale (short): FoGo PAC prioritizes permitting speed that preserves enforceable environmental review, transparency, and accountability for community and ecosystem impacts.
Results
| Member | Role / Relevance | H.R. 471 (FOFA) | H.R. 4776 (SPEED) | Points Earned | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bruce Westerman (AR) | Chair, House Natural Resources Committee | Yea (Aligned) | Yea (Not aligned) | 4 / 8 | 50% |
| Brett Guthrie (KY) | Chair, House Energy & Commerce Committee | Yea (Aligned) | Yea (Not aligned) | 4 / 8 | 50% |
| Jason Smith (MO) | Chair, House Ways & Means Committee | Yea (Aligned) | Yea (Not aligned) | 4 / 8 | 50% |
| Angie Craig (MN) | Ranking Member, House Agriculture Committee | Yea (Aligned) | Nay (Aligned) | 8 / 8 | 100% |
| Richard Neal (MA) | Ranking Member, House Ways & Means Committee | Nay (Not aligned) | Nay (Aligned) | 4 / 8 | 50% |
| Frank Pallone (NJ) | Ranking Member, House Energy & Commerce Committee | Nay (Not aligned) | Nay (Aligned) | 4 / 8 | 50% |
Committee jurisdictions that matter for FoGo PAC (House)
- Natural Resources: federal forest management policy, public lands, wildfire resilience frameworks, ESA/NEPA touchpoints.
- Agriculture: forestry programs, conservation incentives, biomass/forest products supply chain impacts, rural community and small producer supports.
- Ways & Means: trade and tariff policy that can reward clean supply chains; tax incentives relevant to sustainable manufacturing and forest restoration.
- Energy & Commerce: product supply chains, consumer protection, and oversight issues that can affect traceability and corporate accountability.
Methodology notes
- Vote selection: only votes with a direct, non-trivial relationship to forest governance, permitting standards, or forest-risk commodity accountability are included.
- Why only two votes? This scorecard is designed to avoid “padding.” Forest Green will only add votes when the connection to forest outcomes is clear enough to justify scoring.
- Next update trigger: new floor votes or enacted packages that materially change forest management practice, oversight, or supply-chain enforceability.
Scoring All House Members
- Vote A (H.R. 471 / FOFA):
- Yea = +1 (supports active forest management / wildfire risk reduction policy vehicle)
- Nay/Not Voting = 0
- Vote B (H.R. 4776 / SPEED Act):
- Nay = +1 (signals caution about broad NEPA rollbacks / rush-to-permit incentives)
- Yea/Not Voting = 0
Total score: 0–2
- 2 = “Forest + Safeguards” (supports forest action, resists blanket review rollbacks)
- 1 = “Mixed”
- 0 = “Off-ramp” (no meaningful alignment with Forest Green’s guardrails)
Primary Jurisdiction Lanes
Forest policy & federal lands: House Natural Resources (public lands, forests, grazing, minerals)
Wildfire response / resilience funding streams: Appropriations (Interior-Environment; also Homeland as relevant)
Forest products, biomass, rural markets: Agriculture (rural development; forestry interfaces via ag/rural programs)
Permitting / NEPA reform vectors: Transportation & Infrastructure (Clean Water Act/permits), Energy & Commerce (energy infrastructure), and often Natural Resources where public lands are central.