John James

Became law (3)

• 

  John James (R-MI)· Jun 12

  Their bill

  Providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards; Heavy-Duty Vehicle and Engine Emission Warranty and Maintenance Provisions; Advanced Clean Trucks; Zero Emission Airport Shuttle; Zero-Emission Power Train Certification; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision".

  H.J.Res. 87 Environmental Protection

  A Republican resolution with 24 Republican cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Became law

  The Senate voted 51–45 on May 22.

  This is a Joint Resolution from the 119th Congress. It seeks to express congressional disapproval of a specific rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency.

  Yes· 2 of 3

  • Scored +3

    Would business owners be better off under this?

    The resolution may reduce compliance costs for businesses involved in heavy-duty vehicle manufacturing and operation.

  • Scored +3

    Does this leave more decisions to the states?

    By nullifying the EPA rule, the resolution supports the ability of states like California to set their own standards.

  The opposite· 2 of 6

  • Scored -5

    Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?

    By nullifying the EPA rule, the resolution weakens specific state-level environmental protections for vehicle emissions.

  • Scored -5

    Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?

    The resolution halts emission standards for heavy-duty vehicles and airport shuttles, which may lead to higher emissions.

• 

  Jay Obernolte (R-CA)· Jun 12

  Cosponsored

  Providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "California State Motor Vehicle and Engine and Nonroad Engine Pollution Control Standards; The 'Omnibus' Low NOX Regulation; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision".

  H.J.Res. 89 Environmental Protection

  A Republican resolution with 32 Republican cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Became law

  The Senate voted 49–46 on May 22.

  This joint resolution states that Congress disapproves of a specific rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency.

  Yes

  • Scored +3

    Does this leave more decisions to the states?

    The resolution supports state-level control by nullifying federal oversight of the EPA rule.

  • Scored +2

    Would business owners be better off under this?

    Automotive and engine manufacturers may face lower regulatory burdens.

  The opposite· 2 of 7

  • Scored -4

    Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?

    Disapproving the EPA rule weakens existing environmental standards for motor vehicle pollution.

  • Scored -3

    Would people in cities be better off under this?

    Lowering emissions standards can negatively impact air quality in densely populated urban areas.

• 

  John Joyce (R-PA)· Jun 12

  Cosponsored

  Providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards; Advanced Clean Cars II; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision".

  H.J.Res. 88 Environmental Protection

  A Republican resolution with 41 Republican cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Became law

  The Senate voted 51–44 on May 22.

  This joint resolution expresses congressional disapproval of a specific rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency.

  Yes

  • Scored +5

    Does this leave more decisions to the states?

    By striking the EPA rule, Congress supports the ability of states like California to set their own stricter standards without federal interference.

  • Scored +3

    Would business owners be better off under this?

    Automotive manufacturers may benefit from the reduction in stricter regulatory requirements for vehicle emissions.

  The opposite· 2 of 6

  • Scored -5

    Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?

    The resolution undermines environmental standards set by the EPA for motor vehicle emissions.

  • Scored -5

    Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?

    Stripping the EPA rule reduces the regulatory pressure to transition to cleaner vehicle standards, potentially slowing carbon emission reductions.

Passed one chamber, waiting on the other (14)

Halfway: the other chamber has to pass the same text before it can go to the President.

• 

  John James (R-MI)· Feb 11

  Their bill

  Securing America’s Critical Minerals Supply Act

  H.R. 3617 Energy

  A Republican bill with 4 Republican cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Passed the House

  223 – 206

  Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Energy and Natural Resources · Feb 12

  This bill seeks to amend the Department of Energy Organization Act. It aims to secure the supply of critical energy resources, such as minerals and other materials, that are essential to the United States energy sector.

  Yes· 2 of 11

  • Scored +3

    Is this likely to grow the economy?

    Strengthening domestic energy resource supplies supports industrial stability and potential economic growth.

  • Scored +3

    Is this likely to create jobs?

    The emphasis on increasing domestic production and processing of critical minerals may lead to job growth in those sectors.

  No question was scored the opposite.

• 

  John James (R-MI)· Apr 28

  Their bill

  Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act of 2025

  H.R. 2444 Commerce

  A Republican bill with 3 Democratic cosponsors.

  Passed the House

  By voice vote, no names recorded

  Now: in the queue for a floor vote, with no date set · Apr 29

  This bill creates a program within the Department of Commerce to protect critical supply chains and emerging technologies.

  Yes· 2 of 20

  • Scored +5

    Is this likely to create jobs?

    The bill specifically identifies opportunities to create high-quality manufacturing jobs.

  • Scored +5

    Does this strengthen ties with allied countries?

    Focuses on increasing partnerships and building capacity with allies and key international partner nations.

  The opposite

  • Scored -2

    Does this give people more control over their personal data?

    Allows disclosure of voluntarily shared information for criminal investigations or reporting to Congress.

  • Scored -2

    Does this protect people from being watched or searched?

    Contains exceptions to the protection of voluntarily shared information.

• 

  Gus Bilirakis (R-FL)· Nov 12

  Cosponsored

  Major Richard Star Act

  H.R. 2102 Armed Forces and National Security

  A Republican bill with 207 Democratic cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Passed the House

  392 – 18

  Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Armed Services · Nov 12

  This bill changes the rules to allow certain military retirees to receive both veterans' disability compensation and retired pay at the same time.

  Yes· 2 of 3

  • Scored +8

    Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?

    This bill provides significant financial relief to veterans with combat-related disabilities by allowing them to receive both retired pay and disability compensation concurrently.

  • Scored +7

    Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive?

    The bill increases financial benefits for veterans with combat-related disabilities by allowing concurrent receipt of retired pay and disability compensation.

  No question was scored the opposite.

And 11 more on their Sponsored and Cosponsored pages.

Who their bills would affect

• Would households on low incomes be better off under this? 7 no, 50 yes. 5 of these passed a chamber (2 yes, 3 no)
• Would business owners be better off under this? 13 no, 38 yes. 7 of these passed a chamber
• Would children be better off under this? 2 no, 31 yes. 1 of these passed a chamber
• Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? 3 no, 26 yes. 1 of these passed a chamber

What else they would change

• Does this give the federal government more power? 6 no, 49 yes. 9 of these passed a chamber (5 yes, 4 no)
• Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? 0 no, 47 yes. 6 of these passed a chamber
• Does this make health care easier to get in general? 0 no, 29 yes. 1 of these passed a chamber
• Is this likely to grow the economy? 0 no, 28 yes. 3 of these passed a chamber