Pay to Spray

Campaign Contributions and Pesticide Legislation

Sunday, June 2, 1996

Pay to Spray

Campaign Contributions and Pesticide Legislation

Pesticide companies, agribusiness, food corporations, and farm groups strongly support the passage of H.R. 1627 and S. 1166, the House and Senate versions of the so-called Food Quality Protection Act, which would implement an across-the-board rollback of current federal safeguards that protect the public from pesticides in the environment and the food supply. These bills would:

  • Repeal the Delaney Clause that prohibits cancer causing pesticides in processed foods, and replace it with a vague, undefined "negligible risk" standard, and a requirement to consider farmers profits on par with protection of the public health.
  • Weaken already inadequate protections for infants and children.
  • Prohibit states from setting food safety standards that are more protective than the Federal standard.
  • Do nothing to stop the "Circle of Poison", the export of pesticides which are banned in the U.S., then used abroad and returned to American consumers on imported food.
  • Do nothing to stop widespread use of weed killers that contaminate the drinking water of millions of Americans.

An integral part of the campaign to weaken pesticide laws is political campaign contributions made by political action committees (PACs) associated with these industries. Under the banner of the Food Chain Coalition, 145 pesticide, food industry, farmer, and agribusiness PACs have given almost $13.4 million ($13,381,413) to current members of Congress since November 1992.

A total of 145 Food Chain Coalition PACs gave almost $9.3 million to current members of the House since November 1992. The 241 co-sponsors of H.R. 1627 received $6.8 million (73 percent) of the $9.3 million given. On average, House members co-sponsoring H.R. 1627 received more than twice as much as House members not supporting the bill; $28,400 to co-sponsors, compared to $12,800 given to non-sponsors of the bill.

Pay to Spray analyses PAC contributions in relation to co-sponsorship of industry supported legislation, committee assignment, and by pesticide use in Congressional districts. When we compared pesticide use by Congressional district to PAC contributions and co-sponsorship of industry supported legislation, we found that campaign contributions from Food Chain Coalition members was a far more reliable predicter of support for H.R. 1627 than constituent interest, defined here as high pesticide use in a congressional district.

PAC contributions are clearly targeted to powerful members of Congress. Representative Thomas Bliley (R-VA), chairman of the Commerce Committee received more than $97,500 from Food Chain Coalition PACs since November 1992, placing him 6th among all members of the House, behind Pat Roberts (R-KS), Vic Fazio (D-CA), Charles Stenholm (D-TX), Newt Gingrich (R-GA) and Kika de la Garza (D-TX). All but the Speaker, who typically does not co-sponsor legislation, are co-sponsors of H.R. 1627.

Campaign giving was further targeted to the members of the relevant committees. House Commerce Committee members that co-sponsor H.R. 1627 received $39,700 on average, compared to Commerce Committee non co-sponsors, who received only $15,500. Ten members of the committee received more than $50,000 since the November 1992 elections; eight of these are co-sponsors of H.R. 1627, one is the former chairman of the committee, John Dingell (D-MI), and the other is Wilbert "Billy" Tauzin (R-LA). Eight of the 14 members of the committee who have not sponsored H.R. 1627 received less than $5,000 from Food Chain Coalition PAC's.

In the Senate, 133 Food Chain Coalition PACs gave over $4 million to sitting Senators since November 1992. Kay Bailey Hutchinson was the largest recipient at $191,230, followed by Mike Dewine (R-OH) at $156,255 and Rick Santorum (R-PA) at $151,734 and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) at $139,500. Eight Senators received over $100,000 since November 1992, nineteen received over $75,000. The average Senate incumbent (not including presidential candidate Robert Dole) got $39,758.

Brief Summary

Guess what's coming to dinner? And to breakfast and lunch? More pesticides, that's what!

Over half of the House of Representatives have signed on to the pesticide industry's dream bill H.R. 1627, which will severely weaken America's already weak federal laws to keep high risk pesticides out of our food, air and water. Why are they doing this? One factor may be the $13 million in campaign contributions by the pesticide and food industries.

This coalition of pesticide and food corporations targeted their contributions to Congress in two ways. First they contribute more heavily to members of Congress that signed on to the pro-pesticide bill as cosponsors. In the House, the average contribution from "Pay to Spray" PACs to cosponsors was twice that of non-cosponsors. In the Senate the average cosponsor got one and one half times as much as the non-cosponsors.

Second, campaign contributions flow to industry supporters on powerful committees. Pesticide and food industry campaign cash has been disproportionately given to cosponsors of H.R. 1627 on the House Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over pesticide legislation. Sponsors of the industry backed bill on the committee received $11,300 more than the average cosponsor in the house, and two and a one half times more campaign money from "Pay to Spray" PACs than non-supporters on the committee.

Foreword

Guess what's coming to dinner? And to breakfast and lunch?

More pesticides, that's what.

Fully 241 members of the House of Representatives have signed on to the pesticide industry's dream bill, which will severely weaken America's already weak federal laws to keep high-risk pesticides out of food, water and air. As this report goes to press, the House Commerce Committee is preparing to approve, and send on to the full House, H.R. 1627, the Pesticide Deregulation Act. (Official title: "Food Quality Protection Act.")

What kinds of pesticides can we look forward to getting more of in our food if this bill becomes law? Precisely the kinds of pesticides that have been found to cause cancer in laboratory animals. A court victory by the Natural Resources Defense Council threatens finally to make the government enforce a law long on the books that prohibits cancer-causing pesticides in certain foods. The pesticide industry's bill would nullify that law and render the court decision moot. How's that for "Food Quality Protection"?

But we'll also be eating (and sometimes drinking) more pesticides that have other disturbing properties, such as the capacity to disrupt delicate hormonal systems. A recent, widely publicized study found that when some pesticides occur in combinations, they can disrupt hormone systems with 1,000-times greater potency than the same pesticides would have individually. And combinations of pesticides are what the average American already eats every day, and very nearly in every meal. Tests by USDA last year found 9 pesticides in a single sample of apples. When we studied computer records from the Food and Drug Administration's pesticide testing program, we found that 108 pesticides were detected in just 22 fruits and vegetables over a 2 year period.

It's obvious why major pesticide and food companies and farm groups want to weaken federal pesticide laws. Pesticide companies will sell more of their highly profitable products, food companies won't be bothered by "burdensome" pesticide standards, and farmers will face much less regulatory pressure to cut back on pesticide use.

But why would members of Congress side with pesticide and food companies and against their constituents? Why would someone vote to serve up more pesticides in food when the vast majority of Americans consistently say they want less?

One factor may well be the $13.4 million appetizer of campaign contributions that food, pesticide and farm interests have ladled out to current members of Congress since November, 1992. Siding with the pesticide deregulatory crowd seems to pay off nicely in campaign cash. House members who now co-sponsor H.R. 1627 on average received more than twice as much in campaign funds from pro-pesticide political action committees (PACs) as those who do not co-sponsor the bill ($28,400 vs. $12,800). Senate co-sponsors of S. 1166, the Senate version of the Food Quality Protection Act, likewise were handsomely rewarded compared to those not co-sponsoring ($55,421 vs. $33,973 from pro-pesticide PACs).

Most Americans don't have thirty or forty thousand bucks lying around to help them express their opinion to Congress about pesticides in food. With this report, at least the public will know who did have that kind of cash to kick into this latest bid to weaken pesticide regulation, and who in Congress took them up on the offer.

KENNETH A. COOK
PRESIDENT

Chapter 1: Pesticide Industry Special Interest Groups

The Food Chain Coalition is comprised of over 230 corporations, trade associations and organizations representing all aspects of the U.S. pesticide and food industries, including farmers, pesticide manufacturers, farm suppliers, food processors and retailers. Led by the National Food Processors Association (NFPA) and the American Farm Bureau Federation, the Food Chain Coalition includes organizations such as the American Crop Protection Association (ACPA), representing pesticide manufacturers, the Grocery Manufacturers of America, Inc. (GMA), representing large food corporations, the National Cattleman's Association, United Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Association (UFFVA) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (see Appendix A).

The Food Chain Coalition, along with many of its member associations, actively supports the weakening of pesticide laws embodied in The Food Quality Protection Act, H.R. 1627, sponsored by Thomas Bliley (R-VA) and S. 1166 sponsored by Richard Lugar (R-IN).

The legislation would substantially weaken protections for infants and children from pesticides in food. It would:

  • Repeal the Delaney Clause of the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act that prohibits cancer causing pesticides in processed foods, and replace it with a vague, undefined negligible risk standard, and a requirement to consider farmers profits on par with protection of the public health.
  • Weaken protections for infants and children. For the first time ever, the bill would require the EPA to weigh agribusiness profits against the dollar value of the risks to the public health, for each individual use of a pesticide. The bill explicitly allows the profits of farmers in just one state to justify risks to infants and children (or any other segment of the public), that would otherwise exceed a neglible risk level.
  • Reverse the current burden of proof so that EPA would have to prove that a pesticide is unsafe before taking action to protect the public. This would replace the current standard that requires pesticide manufacturers to prove that new pesticides are safe before they are used.
  • Prohibit states from setting food safety standards that are more strict than the Federal standard.
  • Make it extremely burdensome for the United States to have tougher pesticide food residue tolerances than the international standards set by the CODEX Commission.
  • Do nothing to stop the "Circle of Poison", the export of pesticides which are banned in the U.S., then used abroad and returned to American consumers on imported food.

A number of the more politically active trade organizations in the Food Chain Coalition have testified at recent hearings in support of H.R. 1627 and S. 1166, including ACPA, GMA, NFPA, and the American Farm Bureau Federation. In a February 1996 letter to Congress, the Food Chain Coalition called for "urgent" reform of the Delaney clause in order to "prevent the needless loss of many safe and essential crop protection tools". The "crop protection tools" referred to are cancer causing pesticides that were named in a recent court ordered settlement between the EPA and the Natural Resources Defense Council over enforcement of the Delaney clause. Pursuant to that agreement, the EPA agreed to ban the use of 37 cancer-causing pesticides on some crops for use in processed foods and review the safety of about 40 others. The EPA estimates that only 10 percent of the uses of these pesticides will be affected by these actions.

PACs

Political Action Committees (PACs) are a product of campaign reform law enacted in the 1970s. They allow corporations, unions, banks, and other organizations to sidestep longstanding prohibitions on the use of funds for political purposes, by collecting voluntary contributions from members or employees for distributon to political candidates. A key provision of federal election law allows corporations and unions to use general treasury funds to administer PACs and to pay the costs of soliciting contributions to PACs from employees, stockholders, and their family members.

Most large corporations have PACs. Some, for example Dow Chemical, have as many as ten. Most trade associations also have PACs. To trace the full influence of trade association PACs, it is necessary to analyze the contributions made by each of the corporate members of each association.

For this analysis, EWG identified all PACs associated with member companies and associations in the Food Chain Coalition and traced their campaign contributions to members of Congress since the November 1992 elections. Campaign contributions were then compared to co-sponsorship of industry supported legislation in both the House and Senate. Lastly, co-sponsorship and campaign contributions from Food Chain Coalition PACs were analyzed in relation to agricultural pesticide use in congressional districts.

Identifying the Food Chain PACs

The PACs included in this report are members of either the Food Chain Coalition, the Farm Bureau, ACPA, GMA or NFPA with the addition of three chemical association PACs - the Chemical Manufacturers Association, the Chemical Producers and Distributors Association and the Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association, Inc. - that have testified recently in favor of H.R. 1627 or S. 1166. Many companies are members of more than one of these associations.

Membership lists for trade associations typically are available only to members and industry. EWG obtained a list of members of the Food Chain Coalition published in May 1994, then added to that list signatories to recent letters the Coalition has sent to Congress. A World Wide Web search yielded additional membership information.

EWG also included in the Food Chain Coalition companies listed in publicly available directories from the GMA and ACPA and a list of the NFPA board of directors found in their annual report.

The latest reference, from the ACPA Home Page, claims that the Food Chain Coalition has more than 230 members. Not all of these members, however, have PACs and not all members with PACs made contributions to members of Congress since the November 1992 election. In total, 170 Food Chain Coalition PACs were identified for this report, 145 of which gave $13.4 million to members of Congress since November 1992. These 145 PACs were linked to 97 Food Chain Coalition corporations or trade associations.

Campaign Contribution Data

Data on campaign contributions from PACs and individuals are available to the public from the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The FEC records include the name of the PAC, the parent company that sponsors the PAC (if any), the location of that company's headquarters, the date of the contribution, the recipient and the office that the candidate is seeking.

This analysis examines Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions that were reported to the FEC after the 1992 November elections. The subsequent three and one half years contain two distinct election cycles, one for 1994 and the other for 1996. Limiting the analysis to the 1994 and 1996 election cycles ensures that Food Chain Coalition campaign contributions made to the large number of House members defeated in 1994, do not distort the analysis. With few exceptions*, all members of the present House of Representatives were elected or reelected in 1994.

Campaign contributions reported to the FEC after April 22, 1996 are not included in this analysis. Because most contributions occur in the six months immediately preceding the election, the total amount of campaign money received from Food Chain Coalition PACs by current House and Senate members, will increase substantially by November 1996.

(*The exceptions being members who have replaced others who have left office suddenly or moved to the Senate midterm.)

Chapter 2: Campaign Contributions by Food and Pesticide Industry PACs

PAC by PAC

PACs linked to the Food Chain Coalition gave a total of $13,381,413 to current members of Congress from November 1992 through April 1996. The top twenty-five Food Chain Coalition member PACs dominated the donations, giving $9,232,048 or 69 percent of the total given by all 145 PACs.

The top five campaign contributors from the Food Chain Coalition were RJR Nabisco Inc., Philip Morris Inc., American Crystal Sugar, PepsiCo, and the National Cattlemen's Association (Figure 1).

Figure 1: The top 25 Food Chain Coalition members with PACs contributed 70 percent of all Food Chain Coalition PAC money

Bar chart showing PAC contributions

 

Note: Data for the 1994 and 1996 election cycles (November 1992 through April 30, 1996.) For a list of individual PACs, refer to Appendix B.

Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from Federal Election Commission data.

 

Top Recipients

House of Representatives. Total contributions to current members of the House from Food Chain Coalition PACs since November 1992 were over $9.3 million ($9,326,313). Contributions went disproportionately to industry supporters; the 241 co-sponsors of H.R. 1627 received 73 percent of all contributions made to House members by Food Chain Coalition PACs, or $6,849,080.

House co-sponsors of H.R. 1627 received $28,400 on average, compared with $12,700 received on average by members who are not co-sponsors of the bill (Figure 2). Five members of the House got over $100,000 in contributions (Table 1), and all of them save the Speaker, who typically does not sponsor legislation, co-sponsored H.R. 1627. The top recipient was Pat Roberts (D-KS) who received $161,980 in Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions, followed by Vic Fazio (D-CA), Charles Stenholm (D-TX), Newt Gingrich (R-GA), and Kika de la Garza (D-TX).

Figure 2: Sponsors of industry-supported legislation in the House of Representatives received more than twice as much campaign money

bar chart

 

Note: Data for the 1994 and 1996 election cycles (November 1992 through April 22, 1996.)

Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from Federal Election Commission data.

 

Table 1: Five members of the House of Representatives received more than $100,000 in Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions

Rank Representative Total Food Chain
Coalition PAC
Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
Number of PACs Contributing H.R. 1627 Cosponsor
1 Roberts (R-KS) $ 161,980 69 X
2 Fazio (D-CA) $ 122,470 43 X
3 Stenholm (D-TX) $ 118,449 74 X
4 Gingrich (R-GA) $ 114,412 50  
5 de la Garza (D-TX) $ 105,723 48 X
6 Bliley (R-VA) $ 97,581 55 X
7 Emerson (R-MO) $ 89,500 57 X
8 Payne, L. (D-VA) $ 81,499 35 X
9 Mcintosh (R-IN) $ 80,610 50 X
10 Tauzin (R-LA) $ 78,886 52  
11 Delay (R-TX) $ 78,150 37 X
12 Laughlin (R-TX) $ 77,937 33 X
13 Dooley (D-CA) $ 77,249 49 X
14 Thomas (R-CA) $ 71,275 40 X
15 Durbin (D-IL) $ 70,013 46  
16 Nussle (R-IA) $ 69,648 40 X
17 Rangel (D-NY) $ 69,425 27  
18 Allard (R-CO) $ 68,950 39 X
19 Gibbons (D-FL) $ 68,872 42  
20 Dingell (D-MI) $ 68,150 37  
21 Gephardt (D-MO) $ 67,750 26  
22 Herger (R-CA) $ 66,604 43 X
23 Condit (D-CA) $ 65,865 41 X
24 Boehner (R-OH) $ 65,481 42 X
25 Pombo (R-CA) $ 64,190 40 X
26 Oxley (R-OH) $ 62,450 46 X
27 Crapo (R-ID) $ 60,950 47 X
28 Boucher (D-VA) $ 59,953 35 X
29 Hayes (D-LA) $ 58,842 38 X
30 Brewster (D-OK) $ 58,250 42 X
31 Bunning (R-KY) $ 57,550 31 X
32 Thurman (D-FL) $ 56,267 34 X
33 Ewing (R-IL) $ 55,800 38 X
34 Hastert (R-IL) $ 55,225 36 X
35 Rose (D-NC) $ 54,200 29 X
36 Doolittle (R-CA) $ 52,620 28 X
37 Gordon (D-TN) $ 52,500 21 X
38 Barton (R-TX) $ 52,379 35 X
39 Paxon (R-NY) $ 51,800 38 X
40 Camp (R-MI) $ 49,780 32 X
41 Lincoln (D-AR) $ 49,400 47 X
42 Matsui (D-CA) $ 49,400 35 X
43 Sisisky (D-VA) $ 48,750 19 X
44 Mccrery (R-LA) $ 47,723 32 X
45 Volkmer (D-MO) $ 47,599 24 X
46 Klug (R-WI) $ 45,850 42 X
47 Kingston (R-GA) $ 44,500 26 X
48 Pomeroy (D-ND) $ 44,250 27 X
49 Foley (R-FL) $ 44,146 34 X
50 Fields, J. (R-TX) $ 44,050 34 X

Note: Data for the 1994 and 1996 election cycles (November 1992 through April 30, 1996.)

 

Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from Federal Election Commission data.

The top fifty House recipients of Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions received an average of $68,098, more than 37 percent of all the money given to current members of the House ($3,404,903). Forty-three of the top fifty House recipients of Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions are cosponsors of HR 1627 (Table 1).

In contrast, 40 Representatives took $1,000 or less from these PACs, and only 13 of these members co-sponsored H.R. 1627.

Commerce Committee. PAC contributions flow to committees with jurisdiction and power, and pro-pesticide PAC money is no exception. The forty-nine current members of the House Commerce Committee received over $1.5 million in Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions since the November 1992 elections. Cosponsors of H.R. 1627 on the Commerce Committee received substantially more money than the average co-sponsor in the House - $39,700 vs. $28,400 (Figure 3) and more than two and one half times the money - $15,500 - given to non-supporters of the bill on the Committee. Even members of the Commerce Committee who did not cosponsor H.R. 1627 received more money than the average non co-sponsor in the House - $15,500 vs. $12,800.

Ten members of the Commerce Committee received over $50,000 each since November 1992 (Figure 4). Thomas Bliley (R-VA), chairman of the committee and the original sponsor of H.R. 1627, was the largest recipient of Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions on the Commerce Committee at $97,581. Wilbert "Billy" Tauzin (R-LA) was the second-largest Commerce Committee recipient at $78,886, followed by John Dingell (D-MI), chairman of the committee through December 1994 but not a co-sponsor of H.R. 1627, with a total of $68,150. Twenty-eight of the 31 co-sponsors of H.R. 1627 on the Commerce Committee received more than the House average Food Chain Coalition PAC contribution of $21,490.

Figure 3: Food Chain Coalition PAC money flows to co-sponsors on powerful committees

bar chart

 

Note: Data for the 1994 and 1996 election cycles (November 1992 through April 30, 1996.)

Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from Federal Election Commission data.

 

Figure 4: Ten members of the House Commerce Committee received over $50,000 in Food Chain Coaltion PAC contributions

bar chart

 

Note: Data for the 1994 and 1996 election cycles (November 1992 through April 30, 1996.)

Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from Federal Election Commission data.

 

Senate. The members of the 104th Senate got more than $4 million in campaign contributions from Food Chain Coalition PACs since November 1992.

Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) was the largest recipient of Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions in the 104th Senate at $191,230. Following Hutchinson were Mike Dewine (R-OH) at $156,255 and Rick Santorum (R-PA) at $151,734 and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) at $139,500. Eight Senators received over $100,000 since November 1992, nineteen received over $75,000. The average Senate incumbent (minus presidential candidate Robert Dole) received $39,758.

Thirty-one members of the 104th Senate are cosponsors of the Food Quality Protection Act, S. 1166. The average S. 1166 cosponsor received $52,451 in Food Chain Coalition contributions. The remaining 68 non-cosponsors of H.R. 1166, in the 104th Senate got an average of $33,973. Nineteen cosponsors of S. 1166 got above the average Senate-wide contributions total of $39,758 (Figure 5).

Agriculture Committee. Members of the Senate Agriculture Committee received an above average portion of campaign contributions from the Food Chain Coalition PACs. The average amount of Food Chain Coalition PAC money received by a member of the Agriculture Committee was $42,359. The average amount received by the 12 co-sponsors of S. 1166 on the Senate Agriculture Committee was $52,929. In contrast, non-cosponsors on the Committee received an average of $30,731.

Figure 5: Nineteen of the 32 Senate co-sponsors of S. 1166 got more than the Senate-wide average of Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions

bar chart

 

Note: Data for the 1994 and 1996 election cycles (November 1992 through April 30, 1996.)

Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from Federal Election Commission data.

Chapter 3: Pro-Pesticide Money and Pesticide Use in Congressional Districts

As an additional measure of the influence of PAC dollars on support for industry backed pesticide legislation, EWG examined co-sponsorship and PAC contributions in relation to agricultural pesticide use in congressional districts. Members of Congress representing constituents who apply significant amounts of pesticides face clear and well demonstrated political pressure to support legislation that will ease restrictions on pesticide use. At the same time, many members co-sponsoring H.R. 1627 represent districts with little or no pesticide use, while they receive significant sums of campaign money from industries that perceive a direct financial interest in weakening public health and environmental protections in current law. For purposes of this analysis, pesticide use serves as a proxy measure for constituent interest in support of H.R. 1627 and S. 1166.

Pesticide Use vs. PAC Cash

The House. EWG compared the intensity of estimated pesticide use (pounds per square mile) in congressional districts, to PAC contributions from the Food Chain Coalition and co-sponsorship of H.R. 1627.

As might be expected, members representing districts with the most intensive pesticide use are more likely to cosponsor H.R. 1627 than members with little or no pesticide use in their districts. But, members from districts with heavy pesticide use also receive substantial amounts of money from Food Chain Coalition PACs; about $29,500 on average since November 1992.

Overall, money correlated far more strongly with co-sponsorship of H.R. 1627, than did heavy use of pesticides in a member's district. In fact, average pesticide use in the districts of members not sponsoring H.R. 1627 was higher than pesticide use in the districts of nearly half (117) of the H.R. 1627 co-sponsors.

To better understand the influence of PAC dollars, co-sponsors were analyzed in terms of those with above average and below average pesticide use in their districts. Co-sponsorship of H.R. 1627 correlated far more strongly with money received from Food Chain Coalition PACs than it did with pesticide use.

Agricultural pesticides are used at an average rate of 279 pounds per square mile across the land area of the United States. Pesticide use in the districts of H.R. 1627 co-sponsors ranged from a high of 5,200 pounds per square mile in the district of Richard Pombo (R-CA), to a low of zero (no reported agricultural pesticide use) in 17 congressional districts.

Pesticide use in the districts of co-sponsors with higher than the mean national level of pesticide use, averaged 932 pounds per square mile - more than 7 times the intensity of pesticide use in co-sponsor districts with lower than average pesticide use, which averaged 122 pounds per square mile. Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions to these two groups of co-sponsors, however, were about the same at nearly $29,500 for the co-sponsors with above average pesticide use, vs. $27,500 for co-sponsors representing districts with below average pesticide use. Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions, not pesticide use by constituents, is the common denominator among co-sponsors of H.R. 1627.

Pesticide use in the districts of House members who have not sponsored H.R. 1627, was twice as heavy as pesticide use in the districts of co-sponsors with below average pesticide use; 243 pounds per square mile for non co-sponsors, vs. 122 of pounds per square mile for co-sponsors. Again, higher pesticide use in the home district does not necessarily translate into support for H.R. 1627 (Figure 6).

In contrast, PAC contributions do. Co-sponsors representing districts with below average pesticide use received more than twice the campaign dollars from Food Chain Coalition PACs, than did those House members not sponsoring H.R. 1627 - $27,500 vs. $12,800. Prime examples of this phenomenon are three House co-sponsors with no reported agricultural pesticide use in their districts. These members, Don Young (R-AK), Edolphus Towns (D-NY), and Thomas Manton (D-NY) received an average of $30,400 from Food Chain Coalition PACs, and all co-sponsor H.R. 1627.

Figure 6: Money correlates more closely with support for pro-pesticide legislation in the House of Representatives than pesticide use.

Bar chart

 

Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from Federal Election Commission data.

Note: Data for the 1994 and 1996 election cycles (November 1992 through April 30, 1996.) Pesticide use data from the EWG Pesticide Release Inventory (see appendix A).

The Commerce Committee. The finding that PAC contributions influence co-sponsorship more than pesticide use was even more pronounced on the Commerce Committee than for the House of Representatives as a whole.

As with the full House, Commerce Committee members representing districts with the most intensive pesticide use are more likely to cosponsor H.R. 1627 than members with little or no pesticide use in their districts. These members also receive substantial amounts of money from Food Chain Coalition PACs.

As with the full House, money correlated far more strongly with co-sponsorship of H.R. 1627, than did heavy use of pesticides in a members district. Average pesticide use in the districts of Commerce Committee members not sponsoring H.R. 1627 was higher than pesticide use in the districts of nearly half of the H.R. 1627 co-sponsors on the Commerce Committee.

Pesticides are used at an average rate of 320 pounds per square mile in congressional districts represented on the Commerce Committee. Pesticide use in the districts of H.R. 1627 co-sponsors ranged from a high of 2,302 pounds per square mile in the district of Micheal Bilirakis (R-FL), to a low of zero (no reported agricultural pesticide use) in the districts of Thomas Manton (D-NY), and Edolphus Towns (D-NY).

Pesticide use in the districts of co-sponsors with higher than the mean level of pesticide use averaged 870 pounds per square mile, more than ten times the intensity of pesticide use in co-sponsor districts with lower than average pesticide use, which averaged 78 pounds per square mile. Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions to these two groups of co-sponsors, however, were about the same at nearly $40,400 for the members with above average pesticide use, vs. $39,200 for members representing districts with below average pesticide use.

Estimated pesticide use in the districts of Commerce Committee members who have not sponsored H.R. 1627, was twice that of pesticide use in the districts of co-sponsors with below average pesticide use; 163 pounds per square mile for committee non co-sponsors, vs. 78 pounds per square mile for committee co-sponsors with below average use. Higher pesticide use in this case does not translate into support for H.R. 1627.

In contrast, PAC contributions do. Co-sponsors representing districts with below average pesticide use received more than two and one half times the campaign dollars from Food Chain Coalition PACs, than did members not sponsoring H.R. 1627 - $39,200 vs. $15,500. Prime examples of this phenomenon on the Commerce Committee are Thomas Manton (D-NY) and Edolphus Towns (D-NY), who have no agricultural pesticide use in their districts, but received $28,250, and $35,800 from Food Chain Coalition PACs respectively, and are both co-sponsors of industry supported H.R. 1627.

Appendix B: Total Food Chain Coalition PAC Contributions to All Present Representatives, 1994-1996 Election Cycles

 

Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
ALABAMA      
Bachus (R-AL) 6th $2,250 X
Bevill (D-AL) 4th $13,000 X
Browder (D-AL) 3rd $2,000  
Callahan (R-AL) 1st $13,750 X
Cramer (D-AL) 5th $15,300 X
Everett (R-AL) 2nd $24,350 X
Hilliard (D-AL) 7th $22,500 X
       
ALASKA      
Young, D. (R-AK) At Large $27,800 X
       
ARIZONA      
Hayworth (R-AZ) 6th $26,750 X
Kolbe (R-AZ) 5th $25,000 X
Pastor (D-AZ) 2nd $40,000  
Salmon (R-AZ) 1st $18,700  
Shadegg (R-AZ) 4th $12,450 X
Stump (R-AZ) 3rd $11,500 X
       
ARKANSAS      
Dickey (R-AR) 4th $500 X
Hutchinson (R-AR) 3rd $13,750 X
Lincoln (D-AR) 1st $49,400 X
Thornton (D-AR) 2nd $11,850 X
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
CALIFORNIA      
Baker, W. (R-CA) 10th $31,775 X
Becerra (D-CA) 30th $6,600  
Beilenson (D-CA) 24th $0  
Berman (D-CA) 26th $4,100  
Bilbray (R-CA) 49th $27,350 X
Bono (R-CA) 44th $10,129 X
Brown, G. (D-CA) 42nd $17,250  
Calvert (R-CA) 43rd $37,650 X
Campbell (R-CA) 15th $18,932 X
Condit (D-CA) 18th $65,865 X
Cox (R-CA) 47th $16,100 X
Cunningham (R-CA) 51st $14,850 X
Dellums (D-CA) 9th $5,000  
Dixon (D-CA) 32nd $750  
Dooley (D-CA) 20th $77,249 X
Doolittle (R-CA) 4th $52,620 X
Dornan (R-CA) 46th $2,500 X
Dreier (R-CA) 28th $8,750 X
Eshoo (D-CA) 14th $9,700  
Farr (D-CA) 17th $33,950 X
Fazio (D-CA) 3rd $122,470 X
Filner (D-CA) 50th $5,750  
Gallegly (R-CA) 23rd $14,370 X
Harman (D-CA) 36th $8,500  
Herger (R-CA) 2nd $66,604 X
Horn (R-CA) 38th $500  
Hunter (R-CA) 52nd $10,515 X
Kim (R-CA) 41st $7,200 X
Lantos (D-CA) 12th $1,500  
Lewis, Jerry (R-CA) 40th $30,750 X
Lofgren (D-CA) 16th $1,500  
Martinez (D-CA) 31st $500  
Matsui (D-CA) 5th $49,400 X
Mckeon (R-CA) 25th $8,000 X
Millender (D-CA) 37th $0  
Miller, G. (D-CA) 7th $6,500  
Moorhead (R-CA) 27th $31,900 X
Packard (R-CA) 48th $6,750 X
Pelosi (D-CA) 8th $4,000  
Pombo (R-CA) 11th $64,190 X
Radanovich (R-CA) 19th $29,424 X
Riggs (R-CA) 1st $38,350 X
Rohrabacher (R-CA) 45th $3,750 X
Roybal-Allard (D-CA) 33rd $3,000  
Royce (R-CA) 39th $23,200 X
Seastrand (R-CA) 22nd $17,000 X
Stark (D-CA) 13th $7,500  
Thomas (R-CA) 21st $71,275 X
Torres (D-CA) 34th $1,500  
Waters (D-CA) 35th $4,000  
Waxman (D-CA) 29th $2,000  
Woolsey (D-CA) 6th $9,500  
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
COLORADO      
Allard (R-CO) 4th $68,950 X
Hefley (R-CO) 5th $7,150 X
Mcinnis (R-CO) 3rd $11,350 X
Schaefer (R-CO) 6th $39,000 X
Schroeder (D-CO) 1st $0  
Skaggs (D-CO) 2nd $10,500  
       
CONNECTICUT      
Delauro (D-CT) 3rd $7,250  
Franks, G. (R-CT) 5th $38,200 X
Gejdenson (D-CT) 2nd $7,750  
Johnson, N. (R-CT) 6th $25,900  
Kennelly (D-CT) 1st $22,500  
Shays (R-CT) 4th $2,500  
       
DELAWARE      
Castle (R-DE) At Large $20,600 X
       
FLORIDA      
Bilirakis (R-FL) 9th $34,450 X
Brown, C. (D-FL) 3rd $7,150  
Canady (R-FL) 12th $21,100 X
Deutsch (D-FL) 20th $15,500  
Diaz-Balart (R-FL) 21st $6,100  
Foley (R-FL) 16th $44,146 X
Fowler (R-FL) 4th $6,350 X
Gibbons (D-FL) 11th $68,872  
Goss (R-FL) 14th $1,000 X
Hastings (D-FL) 23rd $4,950  
Johnston (D-FL) 19th $6,750  
Mccollum (R-FL) 8th $17,750 X
Meek (D-FL) 17th $9,700  
Mica (R-FL) 7th $29,000 X
Miller, D. (R-FL) 13th $5,000 X
Peterson, D. (D-FL) 2nd $25,850 X
Ros-lehtinen (R-FL) 18th $7,742  
Scarborough (R-FL) 1st $6,000 X
Shaw (R-FL) 22nd $35,000  
Stearns (R-FL) 6th $22,050 X
Thurman (D-FL) 5th $56,267 X
Weldon, D. (R-FL) 15th $6,250 X
Young, B. (R-FL) 10th $2,200  
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
GEORGIA      
Barr (R-GA) 7th $22,100 X
Bishop (D-GA) 2nd $35,250 X
Chambliss (R-GA) 8th $37,956 X
Collins, M. (R-GA) 3rd $28,600 X
Deal (R-GA) 9th $34,400 X
Gingrich (R-GA) 6th $114,412  
Kingston (R-GA) 1st $44,500 X
Lewis, John (D-GA) 5th $23,512  
Linder (R-GA) 11th $36,850 X
Mckinney (D-GA) 4th $17,383  
Norwood (R-GA) 10th $43,600 X
       
HAWAII      
Abercrombie (D-HI) 1st $7,550  
Mink (D-HI) 2nd $600  
       
IDAHO      
Chenoweth (R-ID) 1st $16,942 X
Crapo (R-ID) 2nd $60,950 X
       
ILLINOIS      
Collins, C. (D-IL) 7th $4,000  
Costello (D-IL) 12th $4,250 X
Crane (R-IL) 8th $31,253 X
Durbin (D-IL) 20th $70,013  
Evans (D-IL) 17th $2,500  
Ewing (R-IL) 15th $55,800 X
Fawell (R-IL) 13th $8,000  
Flanagan (R-IL) 5th $11,400  
Gutierrez (D-IL) 4th $10,750  
Hastert (R-IL) 14th $55,225 X
Hyde (R-IL) 6th $26,850  
Jackson (D-IL) 2nd $1,000  
Lahood (R-IL) 18th $32,450 X
Lipinski (D-IL) 3rd $11,975 X
Manzullo (R-IL) 16th $25,850 X
Porter (R-IL) 10th $24,300 X
Poshard (D-IL) 19th $0 X
Rush (D-IL) 1st $2,500  
Weller (R-IL) 11th $37,551 X
Yates (D-IL) 9th $500  
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
INDIANA      
Burton (R-IN) 6th $11,575 X
Buyer (R-IN) 5th $29,250 X
Hamilton (D-IN) 9th $17,750 X
Hostettler (R-IN) 8th $0 X
Jacobs Jr. (D-IN) 10th $0 X
Mcintosh (R-IN) 2nd $80,610 X
Myers (R-IN) 7th $23,100 X
Roemer (D-IN) 3rd $17,750  
Souder (R-IN) 4th $8,500 X
Visclosky (D-IN) 1st $4,000  
       
IOWA      
Ganske (R-IA) 4th $37,280 X
Latham (R-IA) 5th $42,541 X
Leach (R-IA) 1st $0 X
Lightfoot (R-IA) 3rd $33,811 X
Nussle (R-IA) 2nd $69,648 X
       
KANSAS      
Brownback (R-KS) 2nd $37,650 X
Meyers (R-KS) 3rd $12,738  
Roberts (R-KS) 1st $161,980 X
Tiahrt (R-KS) 4th $11,000 X
       
KENTUCKY      
Lewis, R. (R-KY) 2nd $29,850 X
Ward (D-KY) 3rd $18,000  
Whitfield (R-KY) 1st $20,900 X
Baesler (D-KY) 6th $22,500  
Bunning (R-KY) 4th $57,550 X
Rogers (R-KY) 5th $20,600 X
       
LOUISIANA      
Baker, R. (R-LA) 6th $17,750 X
Fields, C. (D-LA) 4th $3,000  
Hayes (D-LA) 7th $58,842 X
Jefferson (D-LA) 2nd $24,450  
Livingston (R-LA) 1st $20,100 X
Mccrery (R-LA) 5th $47,723 X
Tauzin (R-LA) 3rd $78,886  
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
MAINE      
Baldacci (D-ME) 2nd $7,850  
Longley (R-ME) 1st $4,900 X
       
MARYLAND      
Bartlett, R. (R-MD) 6th $7,450 X
Cardin (D-MD) 3rd $13,725  
Cummings (D-MD) 7th $2,750  
Ehrlich (R-MD) 2nd $28,840 X
Gilchrest (R-MD) 1st $0 X
Hoyer (D-MD) 5th $34,000  
Morella (R-MD) 8th $5,700  
Wynn (D-MD) 4th $2,770  
       
MASSACHUSETTS      
Blute (R-MA) 3rd $15,150  
Frank (D-MA) 4th $1,250  
Kennedy, J. (D-MA) 8th $4,500  
Markey (D-MA) 7th $0  
Meehan (D-MA) 5th $0  
Moakley (D-MA) 9th $14,200  
Neal (D-MA) 2nd $14,500  
Olver (D-MA) 1st $6,000  
Studds (D-MA) 10th $2,500  
Torkildsen (R-MA) 6th ($800)  
       
MICHIGAN      
Barcia (D-MI) 5th $11,020 X
Bonior (D-MI) 10th $32,500  
Camp (R-MI) 4th $49,780 X
Chrysler (R-MI) 8th $12,350 X
Collins, B (D-MI) 15th $4,000  
Conyers (D-MI) 14th $2,500  
Dingell (D-MI) 16th $68,150  
Ehlers (R-MI) 3rd $8,850  
Hoekstra (R-MI) 2nd ($500) X
Kildee (D-MI) 9th $16,200  
Knollenberg (R-MI) 11th $6,850 X
Levin (D-MI) 12th $15,250  
Rivers (D-MI) 13th $2,000  
Smith, N. (R-MI) 7th $0 X
Stupak (D-MI) 1st $26,000 X
Upton (R-MI) 6th $30,829 X
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
MINNESOTA      
Gutknecht (R-MN) 1st $33,350 X
Luther (D-MN) 6th $10,406  
Minge (D-MN) 2nd $39,200 X
Oberstar (D-MN) 8th $5,500  
Peterson, C. (D-MN) 7th $36,256 X
Ramstad (R-MN) 3rd $21,300  
Sabo (D-MN) 5th $21,900  
Vento (D-MN) 4th $6,400  
       
MISSISSIPPI      
Montgomery (D-MS) 3rd $14,250 X
Parker (R-MS) 4th $35,928 X
Taylor, G. (D-MS) 5th $9,750  
Thompson (D-MS) 2nd $11,300 X
Wicker (R-MS) 1st $37,144 X
       
MISSOURI      
Clay (D-MO) 1st $5,000  
Danner (D-MO) 6th $25,800 X
Emerson (R-MO) 8th $89,500 X
Gephardt (D-MO) 3rd $67,750  
Hancock (R-MO) 7th $16,850 X
Mccarthy (D-MO) 5th $19,250  
Skelton (D-MO) 4th $30,600 X
Talent (R-MO) 2nd $44,025 X
Volkmer (D-MO) 9th $47,599 X
       
MONTANA      
Williams (D-MT) At Large $22,750 X
       
NEBRASKA      
Barrett, W. (R-NE) 3rd $42,331 X
Bereuter (R-NE) 1st $27,418 X
Christensen (R-NE) 2nd $41,275 X
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
NEVADA      
Ensign (R-NV) 1st $27,850  
Vucanovich (R-NV) 2nd $21,250 X
       
NEW HAMPSHIRE      
Bass (R-NH) 2nd $10,250 X
Zeliff (R-NH) 1st $28,250  
       
NEW JERSEY      
Andrews (D-NJ) 1st $24,300 X
Franks, R. (R-NJ) 7th $25,423  
Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) 11th $18,515  
Lobiondo (R-NJ) 2nd $13,050  
Martini (R-NJ) 8th $20,900  
Menendez (D-NJ) 13th $15,850  
Pallone (D-NJ) 6th $14,500  
Payne, D. (D-NJ) 10th $4,500  
Roukema (R-NJ) 5th $15,050 X
       
NEW JERSEY - CONT.      
Saxton (R-NJ) 3rd $23,150  
Smith, C. (R-NJ) 4th $850  
Torricelli (D-NJ) 9th $7,500  
Zimmer (R-NJ) 12th $38,950  
       
NEW MEXICO      
Richardson (D-NM) 3rd $1,000  
Schiff (R-NM) 1st $8,761  
Skeen (R-NM) 2nd $29,650 X
       
NEW YORK      
Ackerman (D-NY) 5th $6,000  
Boehlert (R-NY) 23rd $22,900 X
Engel (D-NY) 17th $7,000 X
Flake (D-NY) 6th $5,500  
Forbes (R-NY) 1st $11,500  
Frisa (R-NY) 4th $26,000  
Gilman (R-NY) 20th $13,510  
Hinchey (D-NY) 26th $3,000  
Houghton (R-NY) 31st $34,518 X
Kelly (R-NY) 19th $6,500  
King (R-NY) 3rd $4,500  
Lafalce (D-NY) 29th $3,250  
Lazio (R-NY) 2nd $12,375  
Lowey (D-NY) 18th $13,250  
Maloney (D-NY) 14th $11,550  
Manton (D-NY) 7th $29,250 X
Mchugh (R-NY) 24th $7,500 X
Mcnulty (D-NY) 21st $8,250  
Molinari (R-NY) 13th $24,250  
Nadler (D-NY) 8th $2,500  
Owens (D-NY) 11th $750  
Paxon (R-NY) 27th $51,800 X
Quinn (R-NY) 30th $16,500  
Rangel (D-NY) 15th $69,425  
Schumer (D-NY) 9th $1,000  
Serrano (D-NY) 16th $3,000  
Slaughter (D-NY) 28th $10,500  
Solomon (R-NY) 22nd $33,800 X
Towns (D-NY) 10th $34,800 X
Velazquez (D-NY) 12th $11,875  
Walsh (R-NY) 25th $31,800 X
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
NORTH CAROLINA      
Ballenger (R-NC) 10th $23,500 X
Burr (R-NC) 5th $31,500 X
Clayton (D-NC) 1st $26,950 X
Coble (R-NC) 6th $26,692 X
Funderburk (R-NC) 2nd $26,000 X
Hefner (D-NC) 8th $32,500 X
Heineman (R-NC) 4th $13,800 X
Jones (R-NC) 3rd $25,500 X
Myrick (R-NC) 9th $20,550 X
       
N. CAROLINA - CONT.      
Rose (D-NC) 7th $54,200 X
Taylor, C. (R-NC) 11th $27,975 X
Watt (D-NC) 12th $15,500 X
       
NORTH DAKOTA      
Pomeroy (D-ND) At Large $44,250 X
       
OHIO      
Boehner (R-OH) 8th $65,481 X
Brown, S. (D-OH) 13th $22,300  
Chabot (R-OH) 1st $20,225  
Cremeans (R-OH) 6th $18,150  
Gillmor (R-OH) 5th $28,000 X
Hall, T. (D-OH) 3rd $6,000  
Hobson (R-OH) 7th $23,600 X
Hoke (R-OH) 10th $0  
Kaptur (D-OH) 9th $25,190  
Kasich (R-OH) 12th $34,650  
Latourette (R-OH) 19th $22,350 X
Ney (R-OH) 18th $26,550 X
Oxley (R-OH) 4th $62,450 X
Portman (R-OH) 2nd $0  
Pryce (R-OH) 15th $24,250 X
Regula (R-OH) 16th $0  
Sawyer (D-OH) 14th $5,000  
Stokes (D-OH) 11th $4,500  
Traficant (D-OH) 17th $500 X
       
OKLAHOMA      
Brewster (D-OK) 3rd $58,250 X
Coburn (R-OK) 2nd $24,750 X
Istook (R-OK) 5th $13,250 X
Largent (R-OK) 1st $13,600 X
Lucas (R-OK) 6th $31,600 X
Watts (R-OK) 4th $18,900 X
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
OREGON      
Blumenauer (D-OR) 3rd $0  
Bunn (R-OR) 5th $13,600 X
Cooley (R-OR) 2nd $24,850 X
Defazio (D-OR) 4th $4,600  
Furse (D-OR) 1st $4,500  
       
PENNSYLVANIA      
Borski (D-PA) 3rd $13,250  
Clinger (R-PA) 5th $15,150 X
Coyne (D-PA) 14th $9,700  
Doyle (D-PA) 18th $1,250  
English (R-PA) 21st $26,084 X
Fattah (D-PA) 2nd $8,076  
Foglietta (D-PA) 1st $7,700  
Fox (R-PA) 13th $21,250  
Gekas (R-PA) 17th $2,600 X
       
PENN. - CONT.      
Goodling (R-PA) 19th $500 X
Greenwood (R-PA) 8th $550  
Holden (D-PA) 6th $35,550 X
Kanjorski (D-PA) 11th $2,500 X
Klink (D-PA) 4th $9,150  
Mascara (D-PA) 20th $2,000  
Mcdade (R-PA) 10th $14,500 X
Mchale (D-PA) 15th $4,250  
Murtha (D-PA) 12th $12,500  
Shuster (R-PA) 9th $31,900 X
Walker (R-PA) 16th $22,350 X
Weldon, C. (R-PA) 7th $17,500  
       
RHODE ISLAND      
Kennedy, P. (D-RI) 1st $6,706  
Reed (D-RI) 2nd $3,300  
       
SOUTH CAROLINA      
Clyburn (D-SC) 6th $19,650 X
Graham (R-SC) 3rd $16,000 X
Inglis (R-SC) 4th ($500)  
Sanford (R-SC) 1st $0  
Spence (R-SC) 2nd $14,750 X
Spratt (D-SC) 5th $19,000 X
Representative District 1994-1996 Election
Cycle Food Chain
Coalition Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
H.R. 1627
Cosponsor
SOUTH DAKOTA      
Johnson, T. (D-SD) At Large $39,095 X
       
TENNESSEE      
Bryant, E. (R-TN) 7th $29,900 X
Clement (D-TN) 5th $17,500  
Duncan (R-TN) 2nd $10,500 X
Ford (D-TN) 9th $7,250 X
Gordon (D-TN) 6th $52,500 X
Hilleary (R-TN) 4th $0 X
Quillen (R-TN) 1st $19,250 X
Tanner (D-TN) 8th $20,750 X
Wamp (R-TN) 3rd $0 X
       
TEXAS      
Archer (R-TX) 7th $0 X
Armey (R-TX) 26th $32,800  
Barton (R-TX) 6th $52,379 X
Bentsen (D-TX) 25th $7,750  
Bonilla (R-TX) 23rd $25,350 X
Bryant, J. (D-TX) 5th $8,500  
Chapman (D-TX) 1st $30,300 X
Coleman (D-TX) 16th $14,000  
Combest (R-TX) 19th $27,650 X
de la Garza (D-TX) 15th $105,723 X
Delay (R-TX) 22nd $78,150 X
Doggett (D-TX) 10th $4,668  
Edwards (D-TX) 11th $27,800  
       
TEXAS - CONT.      
Fields, J. (R-TX) 8th $44,050 X
Frost (D-TX) 24th $30,250  
Geren (D-TX) 12th $25,900 X
Gonzalez (D-TX) 20th $0  
Green (D-TX) 29th $16,450  
Hall, R. (D-TX) 4th $41,450 X
Johnson, E. (D-TX) 30th $4,136  
Johnson, S. (R-TX) 3rd $21,600  
Laughlin (R-TX) 14th $77,937 X
Lee (D-TX) 18th $5,950  
Ortiz (D-TX) 27th $14,300  
Smith, Lamar (R-TX) 21st $10,100 X
Stenholm (D-TX) 17th $118,449 X
Stockman (R-TX) 9th $9,000 X
Tejeda (D-TX) 28th $5,500  
Thornberry (R-TX) 13th $9,100 X
Wilson (D-TX) 2nd $5,000  
Senator Total Food Chain
Coalition PAC
Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
S.1166
Cosponsor
     
UTAH      
Hansen (R-UT) 1st $10,250 X
Orton (D-UT) 3rd $8,000 X
Waldholtz (R-UT) 2nd $6,250  
       
VERMONT      
Sanders (I-VT) At Large $0  
       
VIRGINIA      
Bateman (R-VA) 1st $20,910 X
Bliley (R-VA) 7th $97,581 X
Boucher (D-VA) 9th $59,953 X
Davis (R-VA) 11th $26,850 X
Goodlatte (R-VA) 6th $31,650 X
Moran (D-VA) 8th $9,000  
Payne, L. (D-VA) 5th $81,499 X
Pickett (D-VA) 2nd $8,600 X
Scott (D-VA) 3rd $14,000  
Sisisky (D-VA) 4th $48,750 X
Wolf (R-VA) 10th $4,000 X
       
WASHINGTON      
Dicks (D-WA) 6th $10,000 X
Dunn (R-WA) 8th $25,750 X
Hastings (R-WA) 4th $14,500 X
Mcdermott (D-WA) 7th $13,000  
Metcalf (R-WA) 2nd $11,000 X
Nethercutt (R-WA) 5th $15,500 X
Smith, Linda (R-WA) 3rd $5,600 X
Tate (R-WA) 9th $10,500 X
White (R-WA) 1st $9,000  
       
WEST VIRGINIA      
Mollohan (D-WV) 1st $13,100  
Rahall (D-WV) 3rd $17,250  
Wise (D-WV) 2nd $15,400  
       
WISCONSIN      
Barrett, T. (D-WI) 5th $3,750  
Gunderson (R-WI) 3rd $36,068 X
Kleczka (D-WI) 4th $24,150  
Klug (R-WI) 2nd $45,850 X
Neumann (R-WI) 1st $15,750  
Obey (D-WI) 7th $20,737  
Petri (R-WI) 6th $12,500 X
Roth (R-WI) 8th $33,100 X
Sensenbrenner (R-WI) 9th $5,100 X
       
WYOMING      
Cubin (R-WY) At Large $21,100 X

Appendix C: Total Food Chain Coalition PAC contributions to all Senators, 1994-96 Election Cycles

 

Senator Total Food Chain
Coalition PAC
Contributions
11/92 - 4/96
S.1166
Cosponsor
     
ALABAMA    
Heflin (D-AL) $ 7,000 X
Shelby (R-AL) $ 43,000  
     
ALASKA    
Murkowski (R-AK) $ 7,000  
Stevens (R-AK) $ 24,500  
     
ARIZONA    
Kyl (R-AZ) $ 77,700  
Mccain (R-AZ) $ 11,000  
     
ARKANSAS    
Bumpers (D-AR) $ (1,000)  
Pryor (D-AR) $ (1,000) X
     
CALIFORNIA    
Boxer (D-CA) $ 11,000  
Feinstein (D-CA) $ 92,504 X
     
COLORADO    
Brown (R-CO) $0  
Campbell (R-CO) $ 8,800  
     
CONNECTICUTT    
Dodd (D-CT) $ 21,599  
Lieberman (D-CT) $ 68,050  
     
DELAWARE    
Biden (D-DE) $0  
Roth (R-DE) $ 79,461  
     
FLORIDA    
Graham (D-FL) $ 1,000  
Mack (R-FL) $ 93,450 X
     
GEORGIA    
Coverdell (R-GA) $ 54,991  
Nunn (D-GA) $ 1,000  
     
HAWAII    
Akaka (D-HI) $ 7,500  
Inouye (D-HI) $ 9,000 X
     
IDAHO    
Craig (R-ID) $ 61,050 X
Kempthorne (R-ID) $ 18,500 X
     
ILLINIOS    
Braun (D-IL) $ 31,418  
Simon (D-IL) $ 6,450  
     
INDIANA    
Coats (R-IN) $ 9,156 X
Lugar (R-IN) $ 126,640 X
     
IOWA    
Grassley (R-IA) $ 14,000  
Harkin (D-IA) $ 41,000  
     
KANSAS    
Dole (R-KS) $ 117,999 X
Kassebaum (R-KS) $ (1,000) X
     
KENTUCKY    
Ford (D-KY) $0 X
Mcconnell (R-KY) $ 84,000 X
     
LOUISIANA    
Breaux (D-LA) $ 5,500 X
Johnston (D-LA) $ 8,490 X
     
MAINE    
Cohen (R-ME) $ 14,700  
Snowe (R-ME) $ 71,050  
     
MARYLAND    
Mikulski (D-MD) $ 4,250  
Sarbanes (D-MD) $ 3,750  
     
MASSACHUSETTS    
Kennedy (D-MA) $ (300)  
Kerry (D-MA) $ 4,000  
     
MICHIGAN    
Abraham (R-MI) $ 72,250  
Levin (D-MI) $ 14,074  
     
MINNESOTA    
Grams (R-MN) $ 97,812 X
Wellstone (D-MN) $ 10,300  
     
MISSISSIPPI    
Cochran (R-MS) $ 38,713 X
Lott (R-MS) $ 70,715 X
     
MISSOURI    
Ashcroft (R-MO) $ 113,929 X
Bond (R-MO) $ 8,983  
Senator 11/92 - 4/96 Cosponsor
     
MONTANA    
Baucus (D-MT) $ 44,000  
Burns (R-MT) $ 122,650  
     
NEBRASKA    
Exon (D-NE) $0 X
Kerrey (D-NE) $ 96,300 X
     
NEVADA    
Bryan (D-NV) $ 28,500  
Reid (D-NV) $0  
     
NEW HAMPSHIRE    
Gregg (R-NH) $ 38,750  
Smith (R-NH) $ 29,500  
     
NEW JERSEY    
Bradley (D-NJ) $0  
Lautenberg (D-NJ) $ 59,000  
     
NEW MEXICO    
Bingaman (D-NM) $ 33,000  
Domenici (R-NM) $ 57,250  
     
NEW YORK    
D'amato (R-NY) $ 29,050  
Moynihan (D-NY) $ 85,000  
     
NORTH CAROLINA    
Faircloth (R-NC) $ 73,250 X
Helms (R-NC) $ 60,500 X
     
NORTH DAKOTA    
Conrad (D-ND) $ 93,322  
Dorgan (D-ND) $0  
     
OHIO    
Dewine (R-OH) $ 156,255  
Glenn (D-OH) $ 13,500  
     
OKLAHOMA    
Inhofe (R-OK) $ 66,350 X
Nickles (R-OK) $ 3,500 X
     
OREGON    
Hatfield (R-OR) $ 10,000  
Wyden (D-OR) $ 3,200  
     
PENNSYLVANIA    
Santorum (R-PA) $ 151,734 X
Specter (R-PA) $ 14,500  
     
RHODE ISLAND    
Chafee (R-RI) $ 63,300  
Pell (D-RI) $0  
     
SOUTH CAROLINA    
Hollings (D-SC) $ 10,500 X
Thurmond (R-SC) $ 28,000  
     
SOUTH DAKOTA    
Daschle (D-SD) $ 7,000  
Pressler (R-SD) $ 55,700 X
     
TENNESSEE    
Frist (R-TN) $ 66,499 X
Thompson (R-TN) $ 95,099  
     
TEXAS    
Gramm (R-TX) $ 72,700  
Hutchison (R-TX) $ 191,230  
     
UTAH    
Bennett (R-UT) $ 9,500  
Hatch (R-UT) $ 139,500  
     
VERMONT    
Jeffords (R-VT) $ 37,500  
Leahy (D-VT) $ (4,500)  
     
VIRGINIA    
Robb (D-VA) $ 48,147 X
Warner (R-VA) $ 61,000 X
     
WASHINGTON    
Gorton (R-WA) $ 98,030 X
Murray (D-WA) $ 500  
     
WEST VIRGINIA    
Byrd (D-WV) $ 19,000  
Rockefeller (D-WV) $ 20,500  
     
WISCONSIN    
Feingold (D-WI) $ 7,100  
Kohl (D-WI) $0  
     
WYOMING    
Simpson (R-WY) $ 30,500  
Thomas (R-WY) $ 64,200  

 

Key Issues: