Cap and Trade, Part 2:
Waxman-Markey passes the House

28 Jun 2009 in Regulatory Policy, Legislation

HR 2454 (Waxman-Markey) passed the House Friday night 219-212. The mostly party-line vote has interesting details.

Eight Republicans crossed over to support the bill and 44 Democrats crossed over to oppose it. Republican ayes created room for moderate Democrats, such as members of the Blue Dog Coalition, to vote nay. Had these eight Republican ayes (and two who did not vote) opposed the bill, it would have failed 209-222. The bill likely would have passed, but the House leadership would have had to switch at least seven of the 44 nays into ayes. Where would the leadership have found them?

The table below lists all Members who crossed over. For both Republicans and Democrats, the current House term the Member is serving and the Cook Partisan Voting Index are reported. For Democrats, membership in the Blue Dog Coalition also is noted.

The eight Republican crossovers are evenly split between representing districts that lean Republican or lean Democratic. It is reasonable to infer that the four who represent Democratic-leaning districts decided that opposing the bill was politically risky. Of the four crossovers who represent Republican-leaning districts, Bono Mack, Lance, and Smith have previously supported legislation promoting alternative fuels, mitigating climate change, or both. One of the four (Lance) is serving his first term. McHugh's record seems to be more focused on delivering federal benefits to his Upstate New York District. In any case, prior to the vote President Obama announced his intent to nominate McHugh as Secretary of the Army so it is not clear what to make of his vote.

Of the 44 Democratic crossovers, 30 (68%) are members of the 51-member Blue Dog Coalition. While it is not surprising that many crossovers are Blue Dogs, it might be surprising that 21 (32%) Blue Dogs supported the House leadership. Had the Coalition voted as a bloc, they could have either prevented the bill from passing or obtained highly significant changes.

Thirty-six Democratic crossovers (82%) represent Republican-leaning or strongly Republican districts. Eighteen (41%) are in their first or second term and represent Republican-leaning districts. They are especially vulnerable to Republican challengers in 2010. A reasonable inference from these data is that for a critical mass of House Democrats, a vote in favor of HR 2454 was politically risky. These risks do not go away if the Senate passes a cap and trade bill and a conference committee succeeds in bringing a compromise bill to the House floor.

Non-Blue Dog crossovers also are interesting. Reliable liberals Stark (D+22) and Kucinich (D+8) appear to have registered protest votes; presumably they would have preferred a stronger bill. Visclosky's opposition does not appear to be tied to the partisan makeup of his district (D+8), but rather to the likelihood that it would be disproportionately affected. Costello (D+3) and DeFazio (D+2) represent weakly Democratic-leaning, agricultural districts. Costa's California district is more strongly Democratic (D+5) but it also is highly agricultural.

The outlier among Democratic crossovers is Artur Davis. He represents a solidly Democratic (D+18), majority black district in Alabama. His opposition to HR 2454 may be explained by the fact he is running for Governor in 2010. The Cook Partisan Voting Index for Alabama is R+14.

[add a comment]

Add a Comment