The 1990
Legislative
Voting
Chart
Table of Contents
How To Use This Chart 2
1990 Voting Summary 3
1990 Environmental Legislation 4
Assembly Floor Scorecards 11
Assembly Committee Scorecards 14
Senate Floor Scorecards 17
Senate Committee Scorecards 19
District Maps 21
Assembly Roster 23
Senate Roster 27
The California League of Conservation Voters
The California League of Conservation Voters Each year we publish our Legislative Voting Chart to
(CLCV) is the non-partisan campaign arm of the environ- ‘help voters distinguish between the rhetoric and the reality
mental community in California. The League works to s
of a legislator’ environmental record. In recent years as
protect the environmental quality of our state by electing more and more candidates have sought to appeal to
candidates to office and passing environmentally sound s
California’ “environmental vote”, this information has
propositions. become increasingly important.
With 45 Congressional districts and 120 state legisla- For more information about CLCV please contact us
tive seats, California clearly presents a formidable chal- at one of our two offices:
lenge to any grassroots. organization. To meet this
challenge, CLCV conducts early research on candidates 10801 National Blvd. 965 Mission Street
for office and concentrates on environmental races where Suite 550 Suite 750
our campaign resources can be expected to make the dif- Los Angeles, CA 90064 San Francisco, CA 94103
(213) 441-4162 (415) 896-5550
ference in the outcome of a race.
We back our political endorsements with campaign
expertise by assisting, candidates with the media,
fundraising and grassroots organizing strategies they need
to win their races. Each year we assign experienced cam-
paign organizers (known as the Grizzly Corps) to the very
closest environmental contests in the state. On Election
Day we comb the precincts getting environmental voters
to the polls for our candidates.
League canvassers communicate directly with
hundreds of thousands of Californians every year. In addi-
tion to providing information on the environmental voting
records of legislators, they register voters, recruit volun-
teers, generate letters to targeted representatives and iden-
tify “conservation voters”.
Acknowledgements: This chart was compiled by CLCV staff members Tracy Grubbs & Jennifer Dunne with critical assistance
from the following groups and individuals: Sierra Club, Planning & Conservation League, Defenders of Wildlife, Californians Against
Waste, CalPIRG, V. John White & Associates & James Saltzman.
Page 1
The Legislative Process
The route a bill takes through the legislature is a little more support. To pass, a bill needs an absolute majority
perplexing but follows a basic pattern. First, the bill is vote; twenty-one votes in the Senate, and forty-one votes
formally introduced by a member of the Legislature. It is in the Assembly. This means that legislators who are absent
given a number, has its first reading, and is assigned by the or choose not to vote are in effect voting “no”.
Rules Committee to an appropriate committee for review. Once a bill passes the house where it originated; it goes
The Committee review process is critical. Most bills to the other house where it can be passed in identical form,
pass through one policy committee (such as Toxics) and defeated, or amended. If it is amended in a way that is not
one fiscal committee (such as Appropriations) in each satisfactory to members of the first house, three members
house. It is in these committees that bills are either tabled of each house form a conference committee to work out an
for further study, passed, killed, or passed with amend- acceptable compromise. If a compromise cannot be
ments. worked out, the bill dies.
If passed by all the relevant committees, the bill is If a bill passes through both houses, it goes to the
given a reading on the floor. On the floor a bill can either governor who can either sign the bill, veto it, or ignore it,
be passed, defeated, passed with amendments or referred t
If after twelve days the governor hasn’ acted on the bill, it
back to committee. If the author of the bill does not feel becomes a law without his signature. If vetoed, a two-thirds
there are enough votes to pass the bill, he may decide to vote in both houses can override the veto.
withdraw it or place it in the inactive file until there is
How To Use This Chart
The CLCV Legislative Voting Chart evaluates the
1990 California Legislature, on a broad range of environ-
mental issues. The chart lists the most important votes cast
both in committee and on the floor on key bills relating to
the environment. The votes tabulated in the chart are con-
sidered by the environmental community to be the most
significant votes for each bill. They are not necessarily the
final role call votes for each bill.
Pro-environment votes are designated with an “x”
while anti-environment votes are denoted with an “o”.
Speak Out! Members who were absent or not voting at the time the vote
was taken receive an “A” for that vote.
s
The scores to the right of each legislator’ voting
You have the power to express your approval or dis-
record represent the percent of environmentally correct
approval of your representative's performance by casting
votes, excluding absences. Every legislator who voted on
an environmental vote on Election Day. It is also important
at least 60% of the key environmental legislation in 1990.
to remember that legislators rarely hear from their con-
is given a score. Legislators with five or more cumulative
stituents. Because so few people take time to contact their
committee votes are given committee scores in addition to
representatives, one letter is often counted as representing
their floor scores. We encourage our members to check
the opinion of 500 other voters. During the legislative
their legislators’ attendance records and ask them for an
session (January through September) letters to repre-
explanation if they have missed an unreasonable number
sentatives can be sent to:
of votes.
California State Assembly or State Senate
State Capitol Key
Sacramento, CA 95814 x= pro-environment vote
(916) 322-9900 o= anti-environment vote
A = absent or not voting
District office addresses and phone numbers are listed *= not in office or on committee at time of vote
in the state government section in the front of your phone -= voted on less than 60% of floor votes or
book under “Assembly” and “Senate”. accumulated less than 5 committee votes
Page 2 How To Use This Chart
Voting Summary
Assembly Averages Senate Averages
Highest Scores Lowest Scores
Senate Senate
100% 94% 12% 13% 18%
Killea (D-39) Hart (D-18) Doolittle (R- 1) Royce (R-32) Russell (R-21)
McCorquodale (D-12) Roberti (D-23) Rogers (R- 16)
Rosenthal (D-22)
Torres (D-24)
Assembly
Assembly 0% 5% 6%
Johnson (R-64) Harvey (R-33) Jones (R-32)
100% 95% La Follette (R-38)
Areias (D-25) Bane (D-40) McClintock (R-36)
Bates (D-12) Brown, W. (D-17)
Burton (D- 16) Elder (D-57)
Campbell (D- 11) Farr (D-28)
Connelly (D-6) Hannigan (D-4)
Eastin (D- 18) Harris (D-13)
Friedman (D-43) Hughes (D-47)
Hayden (D-44) Johnston (D-26)
Isenberg (D- 10) Lempert (D-20)
Katz (D-39) O’Connell (D-35)
Klehs (D- 14) Peace (D-80)
Margolin (D-45) Speier (D- 19)
Roybal-Allard (D-56) Tucker (D-50)
Sher (D-21)
Vasconcellos (D-23)
Voting Summary Page 3
1990 Environmental Legislation
Below is a description of the most important environmental legislation from 1990. Each bill description in-
cludes a list of the most crucial committee and floor votes on the bill, the environmental community’ positions
on the bill, and the final outcome of the legislation. If critical votes are not listed for a bill then all of the final
committee and floor votes are included in the chart.
AIR POLLUTION with existing penalties for hazardous waste and water
Each year California pays a tremendous price pollution. discharge violations.
for failing to clean up its air. A study done by Cal. Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the
State Fullerton found that if the Los Angeles basin Governor.
met state air quality standards, the region could
save $14.3 billion in health-related costs. Unfor-
tunately, since the passage of the landmark Califor- 4 Air Enforcement
AB 4093 (Roybal-Allard) would have enabled
nia Clean Air Act in 1988, the legislature has not regional air quality districts to halt the operation of
been able to advance the clean air agenda very far. local industries whose air pollution could endanger
In 1989 there were a number of unsuccessful bills public health.
introduced regarding ozone depletion and global Supported by environmentalists. Placed in inac-
warming. In 1990 the legislature managed to pass tive file in Senate Appropriations.
several significant ‘ bills to increase market incen-
tives for low emmission vehicles and to bolster the
New Air District
power of regional air quality districts. Unfortunate-
ly, Governor Deukmejian vetoed every significant 5 SB 1770 (McCorquodale) would have consolidated
air pollution bill that made it to his desk. One of the air quality management programs for eight counties
most devastating casualties was the veto of SB 1905 in the San Joaquin Valley into one regional San Joa-
by Senator Hart which would have encouraged con- quin Valley Air Quality Management District. This
sumers to buy cars which are less polluting. It would have dramatically strengthened basin-wide air
passed with overwhelming support in the legislature quality enforcement.
and gained quite a bit of national media attention Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the
before being vetoed by the Governor. Governor.
1 CFC Phase Out
AB 2532 (Vasconcellos) would have phased out the
6 DRIVEPlus
SB 1905 (Hart) would have created consumer incen-
use of ozone-depleting CFCs in new air conditioning s
tives to fight air pollution. Under Hart’ bill, buyers
systems for cars and buildings. It also would have of dirtier, gas-guzzling cars would have had to pay
required CFCs used in buildings and vehicles to be more sales tax and buyers of cleaner burning, more
recycled. fuel efficient vehicles would have received tax
Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the rebates.
Governor. Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the
Governor.
Air Permits
2 AB 2549 (Roybal-Allard) would have required COASTAL PROTECTION
regional air quality districts to review the compliance In 1989 and 1990, a series of oil tanker spills
records of hazardous waste incinerators before grant- and leaks ranging from the Alaskan Exxon Valdez
ing them permits. The bill would have strengthened disaster to a major spill along the Texas Gulf Coast
the districts’ ability to deny permits. Unfortunately, revealed the need for oil spill prevention and clean-
many of the provisions that made this a strong en- up policies in all parts of the country. California,
vironmental bill were removed in the Senate. The where 1.5 million barrels of oil are transported in
most critical votes on this bill took place in Assembly coastal waters each day, faced its own oil spill at
committees and on the Assembly Floor. Huntington Beach.
Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the In the most important achievement in coastal
Governor. protection in 1990, California enacted the landmark
Oil Spill Prevention and Response Act (SB 2040).
Air Pollution Fines The bill establishes extensive prevention and clean-
3 AB 3783 (Campbell) would have increased penalties up programs to protect the coast and is the strongest,
for air pollution violations and brought them in line most comprehensive measure of its kind in the
Page 4 1990 Environmental Legislation
The Bergeson/Torres Amendment to SB 2040
lifted the $350 million borrowing cap in the "oil spill
response fund". This gives the state unlimited
authority to borrow money for clean-up in case of an
oil spill. The vote took place in Senate Appropria-
tions. Supported by environmentalists.
The Friedman Amendment to SB 2040 established
strict clean-up requirements with primary concern
being given to environmental considerations. The
vote took place in Assembly Natural Resources,
Supported by environmentalists.
The La Follette Amendment to SB 2040 weakened
inspection requirements for tanker safety and clean-
up capabilities. The vote took place in Assembly
Natural Resources. Opposed by environmentalists.
The Hart Amendment to AB 2603 lifted the cap on
country. Very few legislators wanted to go on s
the state’ borrowing authority for oil spill clean-up
record voting against an issue with such universal and increased the size of the clean-up fund. The vote
public support. Consequently, the best indication of took place in Senate Natural Resources. Supported
s
a legislator’ support for oil spill protection are the by environmentalists.
votes on amendments to strengthen or weaken this
important legislation. To his credit, Governor The Dills/Beverly Amendment to AB 2603
Deukmejian signed SB 2040 into law. Unfortunate- weakened the clean-up requirements and decreased
ly, the Governor continued his eight year campaign the size of the clean-up fund. The vote took place in
to dismantle the Coastal Commission by vetoing SB Senate Appropriations. Opposed by environmen-
1787 a bill designed to strengthen the enforcement talists.
of coastal protection laws.
Coastal Enforcement Powers WILDLIFE
7 SB 1787 (Rosenthal) would have enabled the Coastal As forests dwindle and development encroaches
Commission to stop developers from continuing s
on critical wildlife habitat, California’ rare and
projects that violate the Coastal Act. The bill would endangered species continue to receive little help
also increase penalties for those who intentionally from the legislature. The biggest wildlife victory of
violate coastal permit requirements. 1990 was the passage of Prop. 117, the Wildlife
Vetoed by the Protection Initiative on the June ballot. This out-
Governor. standing measure banned the sport hunting of moun-
tain lions and created the Habitat Conservation
Fund to acquire, restore and protect endangered
8 Oil Spill Prevention and Response s
species’ habitats. California’ only other remaining
SB 2040 (Lempert, Keene) provides California with large predator, the black bear, did not fare as well.
the strongest oil spill prevention, response and clean- A bill to protect the bear while population studies
up law in the country. The prevention measures in- are completed was quickly killed in committee. On
clude expanded oil tanker safety programs, mandatory the bright side, a new system of advisory fees for the
oil spill prevention plans, the creation of a new oil spill Department of Fish and Game will help provide
response unit, and the establishment of an emergency s
much needed funds to protect California’ wildlife.
clean-up fund. SB 2040 started out as two separate
bills. The stronger version, AB 2603 (Lempert)
and the weaker version, SB 2040 (Keene), were later
merged. The final version of the bill emerged after
and Funding
9 Fish 3158 Game creates a new system of fees for
AB (Costa)
months of intensive lobbying by environmentalists wildlife advisory services provided by the Depart-
and, the oil industry. The most critical votes on this ment of Fish and Game to developers and agencies.
bill were on the amendments described below. The new fees will generate $4.6 million during fiscal
Supported by environmentalists. Signed into law. year 1991 alone which will be used to help salvage the
Department’s beleaguered wildlife protection
programs. The most critical votes on this bill took
1990 Environmental Legislation Page 5
place on the Senate Floor and on the Assembly con- which could be life-threatening to employees or to
currance vote. the public.
Supported by environmentalists. Signed into law. Supported by environmentalists. Signed into
law.
and
10 Fish 3160 Game Licenses have
AB (Costa) would transferred the 14 Citizen Enforcement have prevented the state
authority to issue licenses and collect fees from the AB 3458 (Friedman) would
politically controlled Fish and Game Commission from forcing plaintiffs in citizen enforcement suits
to the more environmentally oriented Department of to waive their rights to attorney fees in exchange for
Fish and Game. The most critical vote on this bill a favorable settlement. This would have prevented
took place on the Assembly Floor. citizens from being manipulated or penalized for
Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the taking court action to enforce environmental laws.
Governor. Supported by environmentalists. Killed in
Senate Judiciary.
Black Bear Hunting
11 SB 2176 (Hart) would have placed a three-year 15 False Advertising products which make “en-
moratorium on the hunting of black bears while the AB 3994 (Sher) requires
Department of Fish and Game compiled a report on vironmentally friendly” claims such as
the status of the black bear population in California. “biodegradable”, “recyclable” and “ozone-friendly”
Supported by environmentalists. Killed in As- to comply with new environmental advertising
sembly Water, Parks and Wildlife. standards. A violation is a misdemeanor punishable
by a fine of up to $1000 per day.
Supported by environmentalists. Signed into
Fish and Game Commission
12 SCA 44 (Petris) would have changed the name of
law.
the Fish and Game Commission to the Fish and
Corporate Probation
Wildlife Commission and would have changed the
eligibility requirements for Commissioners to better 16 SB 2500 (Hart) would have given state judges the
reflect the Commission’s mandate to protect authority to force corporations convicted of crimes
wildlife. The most critical vote on this bill took against the environment to serve lengthy probation
place on the Senate Floor. sentences in addition to any monetary fines imposed
Supported by environmentalists. Placed in inac- upon them.
tive file after Senate vote. Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the
Governor.
CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY
Given the multitude of 1990 campaign pledges
by candidates to “get tough on crime”, it is en-
couraging to see that environmental criminals also
received attention from the legislature. In 1990 a
series of bills were introduced to hold corporations
and industries more accountable to environmental
laws and standards. The Governor signed a bill to
penalize employees who knowingly allow criminal
corporate behavior to continue. He also signed a
bill requiring companies to comply with specific
standards before using certain environmental terms
in their advertising. Although the Governor would
not enact legislation to establish a probation system
for negligent corporations, the legislature appears
committed to continuing the fight against environ-
mental crime.
LAND USE
The results of the 1990 census are in. Since
13 Corporate Fines increases the fines and penal-
AB 2249 (Friedman) s
1980, California’ population has increased by 6.2
ties against individuals who knowingly allow their million to an astounding 29.8 million people. As
corporation’ criminal behavior to continue. The
s local governments make decisions about how to
bill targets individuals who know about conditions accommodate this flood of new residents, they must
Page 6 1990 Environmental Legislation
also decide the fate of local open space and agricul- bill were in the Senate Housing, Assembly Housing
tural lands. Over the years, the state legislature has and Community Development, and Assembly Local
played a small but increasingly important role in Government committees.
determining how these local decisions are made. Opposed by environmentalists. Opposition
The bills introduced in 1990 indicate that the dropped after bill was amended. Signed into
legislature contains differing views on the subject of law.
land use planning. On the one hand, the legislature
sent to Governor Deukmejian a bill designed to help
local governments keep a close eye on the environ- 20 Mining Near Bodie
SJR 60 (McCorquodale) requests the U.S. Secretary
mental impacts of converting agricultural land to of the Interior to withdraw from mining 23% of the
commercial and other uses. On the other hand, they federal land surrounding Bodie to protect the his-
also sent the Governor an ill-conceived bill which toric park from the effects of cyanide leaching. The
would have forced local governments to accept low- most critical votes on this bill took place on the
income housing developments on any land, even Senate Floor and in the Senate Natural Resources
lands protected from development by local zoning and Wildlife and Assembly Natural Resources com-
ordinances. For the better part of the session, this mittees.
bill pitted developers, real estate brokers and home- Supported by environmentalists. Enacted.
less and low-income housing advocates against en-
vironmentalists and farmers.
RECYCLING & CONSERVATION
In 1989 the legislature passed the Integrated
Farmland Conversion
17 AB 1979 (Areias) would have required local
Waste Management Act (AB 939) which requires
California cities and towns to reduce their waste by
governments to closely monitor the amount of 50% by the year 2000. They also increased the bottle
agricultural land being converted to non-agricul- bill redemption fee to “two for a nickle”. By com-
tural uses. Once a certain number of acres were parison 1990 was a year of more modest achieve-
converted, local governments would be required to \
conduct a study to examine the environmental im-
ment. Environmental activists spent energy working
pacts of future farm, land conversion. The most to clarify AB 939 and to ensure that the “environ-
critical votes on this bill took place in the Senate mentalist” position on the newly created Integrated
Local Government Committee and on the Senate Waste Management board was filled by someone with
Floor. the proper credentials. The legislature also found
Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the itself in the midst of a tug-of-war between bills to
Governor. dramatically strengthen and weaken the state’ bot-s
tle bill law. The glass industry, eager to escape
recycling costs, convinced Assembly Speaker Willie
Development Financing
18 AB 2460 (Hannigan) would have prohibited local
Brown to introduce a bill dismantling key provisions
of the bottle bill. Although the bill was first opposed
governments from approving developments unless by environmentalists, Brown allowed strong pro-en-
they also find ways to fund facilities related to the vironment amendments to be included in his legis-
project such as schools, roads and sewers. The most s
lation. Wary of the glass industry’ lobbying power,
critical vote on this bill took place in the Senate however, Assembly Member Byron Sher introduced
Local Government Committee. s
back-up legislation identical to Brown’ amended
Supported by environmentalists. Killed in s
bill. As it turned out, Brown’ bill was in fact
Senate Local Government. amended back to the original anti-environmental
s
form, and died in committee. Sher’ back-up legis-
19 Low Income Housing
SB 2011 (Greene) forces local governments to ac-
lation passed into law. At the same time, Assembly
Member Margolin, who wrote the original bottle bill
cept new developments if the proposed projects in 1986, made a separate attempt to expand the law
have a specified proportion of low or moderate but was stopped short in committee.
income housing. Local communities would have
been prevented from stopping these projects even if
they conflicted with local ordinances designed to
protect farmland, open space, sensitive habitat and
21 Glass Recycling
AB 1490 (Sher) strengthens the existing “bottle bill”
parks. Environmentalists and farmers opposed this law by increasing the processing fee that is charged
bill because it exposed protected lands to unregu- to container manufacturers. The fee ensures that the
lated development. Fortunately, the environmental- costs of collecting and processing containers are
ly damaging provisions of the bill were removed included in the cost of the products. The bill also
before it became law. The most critical votes on this rebates the processing fee to container manufac-
turers who use California recycled glass, thus creat-
1990 Environmental Legislation Page 7
ing new markets for recycled goods. The most critical FORESTS
vote on this bill was on the amendment described s
California’ remaining old-growth redwoods
below. Signed into law. have been reduced to less than 5% of their original
acreage. For several years, Assembly Member
The Nielson Amendment would have eliminated Byron Sher has attempted to enact strong legislation
the requirement that manufacturers pay the full cost to reform logging practices while protecting jobs in
of recycling their containers. The vote took place in California. Each year he has been defeated by the
Senate Appropriations. Opposed by environmen- powerful timber industry lobby. In 1990 forest ac-
talists. s
tivists, frustrated by the legislature’ record on
forestry issues, placed two forest protection
22 Expanded Bottle Recycling measures directly on the November ballot. Prop
128, the Environmental Protection Initiative (Big
AB 3050 (Margolin) would have expanded the state
beverage container recycling program to include Green), would have provided $200 million in bonds
wine and liquor bottles. for buying critical redwood stands, while Prop 130,
Supported by environmentalists. Killed in the Forest and Wildlife Protection Initiative
Senate Natural Resources (Forests Forever), would have provided $710 mil-
lion in bonds, banned clearcutting, and required the
Board of Forestry to enforce new timber harvest
23 Energy Conservation
AB 3995 (Sher) requires the California Energy
standards. These two initiatives were challenged by
a competing initiative sponsored by the timber in-
Commission and the Public Utilities Commission dustry (Prop. 135). During the campaign the legis-
to include environmental costs in their calculation lature considered passage of a bill (SB 2201)
of the cost-effectiveness of energy resources. The sponsored by Senator Barry Keene which would
most critical votes on this bill took place in the have placed yet another timber industry oriented
Assembly committees and on the Assembly Floor. initiative on the ballot. Fortunately, SB 2201 failed
Supported by environmentalists. Signed into
to pass as did Prop. 135. Unfortunately Props. 128
law.
and 130 also were defeated.
24 SB 2837 (Killea) would have required the following
Disposable Diaper Warning
26 AB 2585 Exports have prevented California
No Log
(Sher) would
warning to be displayed on disposable diaper pack- from selling state-owned trees to companies that
ages: “Single-use disposable diapers create sig- export whole logs out of state. Additionally, the
nificant environmental problems and costs to the state would have been prohibited from buying wood
community when disposed.” products from companies that export logs or mill
Supported by environmentalists. Killed in As- their California timber out of state. Purchasing
sembly Ways and Means. preference would have been given to companies that
process their lumber in California mills.
Supported by environmentalists. Killed in As-
25 Weak Bottle Bill
AB 4298 (Brown, W.) would have dismantled the sembly Ways and Means.
bottle bill law by removing the processing fee
provision. The processing fee ensures that the cost
of collecting and processing containers is included 27 Forestry Initiative
SB 2201 (Keene) would have combined weak
in the costs of the products. This bill was first forestry legislation and a bond initiative to purchase
amended so that it was acceptable for environmen- old-growth redwoods. Environmentalists opposed
talists but later amended back to its original anti-en- s
Keene’ bill because it contained loopholes that
vironmental. content. The most critical-votes on this would allow clearcutting to continue and failed to
bill were on the amendment described below and in prevent the over-harvesting of underage forests.
the Senate Natural Resources Committee. Op-
The most critical votes on this bill took place in the
posed by environmentalists. Killed in Senate
Natural Resources. Senate committees and on the Senate Floor.
Opposed by environmentalists. Killed by Senate
concurrence vote.
The Friedman Amendment strengthened the bill
by requiring manufacturers to pay the full cost of
recycling their containers. The vote took place in TOXICS
Assembly Ways and Means. Supported by en- In 1986 California voters passed the landmark
vironmentalists. s
toxic’ initiative, Proposition 65. The law strictly
limits the dumping of certain toxic chemicals into
drinking water sources and it requires warnings to
Page 8 1990 Environmental Legislation
be posted when anyone is exposed to a significant
Air Toxics
risk from toxic chemicals. Despite Governor
s
Deukmejian’ efforts to hamper the implementation
30 SB 1817 (Roberti) would have established a pro-
of Prop. 65, the law appears to be working. gram for reducing toxic discharges into the air. It
Unfortunately, since the passage of Prop. 65, would have required industries whose pollution
toxics has been a relatively low priority for the poses a serious health risk to prepare a pollution
legislature. This year, however the legislature of- prevention plan for reducing their use of toxic
chemicals.
fered the Governor several bills designed to improve
Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the
the reporting, regulation and reduction of the toxics
Governor.
used and produced by California companies. Unfor-
tunately, the Governor vetoed all three of the bills
that CLCV tracked. TRANSPORTATION
In a relatively short time, the automobile has
become the center of our transportation system,
transforming what was once a fairly comprehensive
rail system into a tangle of crowded freeways .
With highways choked by chronic congestion
and the air polluted by cars carrying only one pas-
senger, we have the impetus to reinvest in mass
transit and to provide incentives for people to get
out of their cars.
This year, while the legislature debated a minor
bill to create mass transit incentives for commuters,
Calfornia voters charged ahead and approved
three initiatives in June of 1990 to repair and expand
s
California’ rail transit system. Prop. 116, the
Clean Air and Rail Transportation Improvement
Act, provides nearly $2 billion in bonds to upgrade
and expand specific light rail, commuter rail and
Amtrak projects. Prop. 108, the Passenger Rail and
Clean Air Bond Act, also provides for rail transit
improvements as funded by a gas tax from Prop.
Toxics Reporting 111, the Traffic Congestion Relief and Spending
28 AB 1728 (Katz) would have required companies Limitation Act.
which currently report the disposal of hazardous
materials to the state also to disclose hazardous Bridge Toll Increases
materials that are manufactured, stored or processed
at their facilities. The bill also would have required
31 SB 2100 (Kopp) would have provided incentives for
people to use public transit by imposing a toll of not
the state to make this information accessible and more than $1 for all state-owned toll bridges in the
useful to the public. The most critical vote on this Bay Area, creating a combined feeder bus service
bill was on the Senate Floor. with BART and a two-for-one discount companion
Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the fare program. Revenues would have paid for better
Governor. traffic operation systems near bridges and a high-
speed water transit system.
Toxic Waste Supported by environmentalists. Placed in inac-
29 SB 1804 (Torres) would have required the state to tive file by Senator Kopp.
regulate wastes based on their toxicity rather than
their source. This would force the Department of
Health Services to monitor more closely substan- WATER RESOURCES
ces like incinerator fly ash. The most critical votes s
California’ preoccupation with water - who has
on this bill took place in the Assembly committees it, who gets it- continues to grow as we enter the fifth
and on the Assembly Floor. year of severe drought. At a time when water con-
Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the servation should take precedence over quick-fix,
Governor. wasteful and environmentally damaging water
projects, there were some bright points in the legis-
lature including the passage of a Senate Joint
Resolution to help facilitate the study of the environ-
1990 Environmental Legislation Page 9
mental impacts of the federal government’ Central
s critical votes on wetlands bills this year involved
Valley Water Project. Fortunately, a misleading decisions about this definition. From an environ-
bill which would have helped to fund more water mental perspective, the narrower the definition, the
development projects never made it to the Senate more likely that true wetlands will gain the protec-
Floor. tion they need.
32 Water Projects
AB 1571 and 1572 (Waters, N.), would have
Wetlands Conservancy
34 AB 4325 (Baker) creates the Inlands Wetlands Con-
authorized the state to finance a water resources servancy Program within the Wildlife Conservation
development program by issuing $100 million in Board in order to acquire and restore wetlands in the
bonds. Although the bills claimed to provide funds Central Valley and other inland areas. The program,
for the “furtherance of conservation of the water funded by the Prop. 117 initiative passed in June
resources of the state” the funds were actually ear- 1990, gives loans and grants to non-profit groups
marked for water development projects. The critical interested in buying and protecting wetlands. The
votes on AB 1571 took place in the Senate Ap- most critical vote on this bill was on the amendment
propriations, and the Bonded Indebtedness and described below. Signed into law.
Methods of Finance Committee. The critical vote on
AB 1572 took place on the Assembly Floor. The Beverly Amendment proposed to use the weak
Opposed by environmentalists. AB 1571 was definition of “wetlands” currently used by the Army
placed in inactive file prior to Senate floor vote. Corps of Engineers rather than the stronger, more
AB 1572 was killed on the Assembly Floor. exclusive definition used by the Fish and Wildlife
Service. The weak definition would result in the
classification of too broad a range of ecosystems as
33 Central Valley Project
SJR 26 (McCorquodale) encourages the federal
wetlands. The vote took place in Senate Appropria-
tions. Opposed by environmentalists.
government to stop selling water from the Central
Valley Project and to determine how much water is
needed to mitigate the adverse effects of the Project
on fish and wildlife. The most critical votes on this 35 AB Net Loss of Wetlandshave stopped public
No
4327 (Isenberg) would
bill took place in the Assembly Water, Parks and agencies from contributing to any net loss of wet-
Wildlife Committee and on the Assembly Floor. lands. Agencies would have been allowed to par-
Supported by environmentalists. Enacted. ticipate in projects that destroyed wetlands only if
twice as many acres of wetlands were created on
site, or three times as many off site. The most
WETLANDS critical vote on this bill was on the amendment
We are becoming increasingly aware of the described below. Killed in Senate Natural
crucial role wetlands play in the fragile chain of life. Resources.
s
More than half of California’ endangered or
threatened species are dependent on wetland The Mello/Garamendi Amendment proposed to
s
habitat for their survival. California’ wetlands also use the weak federal definition of “wetlands” as
provide a critical link in the Pacific Flyway used by explained above in AB 4325. The vote took place
millions of migratory waterfowl each year. Unfor- in Senate Natural Resources. Opposed by environ-
tunately, so many of the-state’ wetlands have been
s mentalists.
drained, filled-in and developed, that only 4% of the
wetlands in the Central Valley remain and less than
5% of the state 's coastal wetlands are intact. As a
result the population of birds wintering in Califor-
36 Wetlands Protection would have established a
SB 344 (McCorquodale)
nia (more than 60% of birds using the Pacific Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley Wetlands Mitiga-
Flyway) has declined dramatically. tion Bank to ensure the creation and protection of
What started out as a promising year with more off-site wetlands when development projects
remove or impact existing wetlands. It would have
than a half dozen wetlands protection bills resulted s
set goals to increase the state’ total wetland
in only a few legislative victories including the acreage. The most critical votes on this bill took
establishment of a Central Valley Wetlands Conser- place on the Assembly and Senate Floors.
vancy. Once again the legislature failed to pass a Supported by environmentalists. Vetoed by the
“no net loss of wetlands” policy for the state. Be- Governor.
cause increasing development pressure has collided
with declining wetland habitat, deciding what is a
wetland and what is not has become an embittering
focus of debate for the legislature. Many of the
Page 10 Environmental Legislation
X = pro-environment vote O = anti-environment vote A = absent or not voting * = not in office
Assembly Floor Scorecards Page 11
X = pro-environment vote O = anti-environment vote A = absent or not voting * = not in office
Page 12 Assembly Floor Scorecards
X = pro-environment vote O = anti-environment vote A = absent or not voting * = not in office
Assembly Floor Scorecards Page 13
Upper case names indicate committee chairs
X = pro-environment vote O = anti-environment vote A = absent or not voting * = not on committee
Page 14 Assembly Committee Scorecards
Upper case names indicate committee chairs.
Assembly Committee Scorecards Page 15
Uppercase names indicate committee chairs.
P a g e 1 6 Assembly Committee Scorecards
X = pro-environment vote O = anti-environment vote A = absent or not voting * = not in office
Senate Floor Scorecards Page 17
X = pro-environment vote O = anti-environment vote A = absent or not voting * = not in office
Page 18 Senate Floor Scorecards
Upper case names indicate committee chairs.
Senate Committee Scorecards Page 19
X = pro-environment vote O = anti-environment vote A = absent or not voting * = not on committee
Page 20 Senate Committee Scorecards
District Maps Page 21
District Maps
Page 22
Assembly Roster
Below is a district-order listing of Assembly Members during the 1990 Legislative session. The description for each
Assembly Member includes their occupation, a listing of their environmental committee assignment(s), and a brief
history of their environmental scores on the flooor (F) and in committee (C). Assembly members are up for re-election
every 2 years. To contact your Assembly Member about his or her environmental, voting record please write to:
Assembly Member
California State Assembly
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
1. Statham, Stan (R) 1990: 95% F, 100% C 1989: 97% F, 80% C
Full-time legislator 1989: 100% F, 100% C 1988: 84% F, 100% C
Elected in 1976. 1988: 100% F, 92% C
Member of Judiciary. 10. Isenberg, Phil (D)
1990: 53% F 5. Leslie, Tim (R) Attorney
1989: 57% F Full-time legislator Elected in 1982.
1988: 31% F, 54% C Elected in 1986. Chair of Judiciary. Member
Member of Judiciary. of Revenue & Taxation;
2. Hauser, Dan (D) 1990: 11% F Water, Parks & Wildlife;
Insurance investigator 1989: 31% F Ways & Means. Bill Filante (R-9) has been one of
Elected in 1982. 1988: 24% F 1990: 100% F the best Assembly Republicans
Chair of Housing & 1989: 97% F, 100% C on the environment. His average
Community Development. 6. Connelly, Lloyd (D) 1988: 96% F, 93% C floor score from 1988 to 1990 was
Member of Local Attorney s
87%, and hi’ average committee
Government; Water, Parks & Elected in 1982. 11. Campbell, Robert J. (D) score was 90%.
Wildlife. Member of Environmental Businessman
1990: 94% F Safety & Toxic Materials; Elected in 1980.
1989: 86% F, 60% C Judiciary; Natural Resources. Member of Water Parks & Member of Revenue &
1988: 88% F, 70% C 1990: 100% F, 100% C Wildlife; Revenue & Taxation.
1989: 100% F, 100% C Taxation; Ways & Means. 1990: 100% F
3. Chandler, Chris (R) 1988: 100% F, 100% C 1990: 100% F, 100% C 1989: 100% F
Attorney 1989: 100% F, 100% C 1988: 96% F
Elected in 1986. 7. Waters, Norm (D) 1988: 96% F, 93% C
1990: 16% F Rancher 15. Baker, William (R)
1989: 39% F Elected in 1976. Waters lost 12. Bates, Tom (D) Businessman
1988: 7% F his seat in 1990 to Full-time legislator Elected in 1980.
Republican David Knowles. Elected in 1976. Vice Chair of Ways &
4. Hannigan, Thomas (D) Member of Housing & Member of Natural Means. Member of
Realtor Community Development; Resources; Public Safety; Transportation.
Elected in 1978, Majority Water, Parks & Wildlife. Revenue & Taxation. 1990: 10% F, 0% C
Floor Leader. 1990: 60% F 1990: 100% F, 100% C 1989: 18% F, 29% C
Member of Local 1989: 75% F, 40% C 1989: 100% F, 100% C 1988: 15% F, 26% C
Government; Transportation; 1988: 67% F, 86% C 1988: 100% F, 100% C
Ways & Means. 16. Burton, John (D)
8. Hansen, Bev (R) 13. Harris, Elihu (D) Full-time legislator
Full-time legislator Attorney & educator Assemblymember 1965-74,
Elected in 1986. Elected in 1978. Harris was Congressman 1974-1982,
Member of Natural elected Mayor of Oakland in Re-elected to Assm. in 1988.
Resources; Transportation; 1990, & has been replaced Chair of Public Safety.
Ways & Means. by Democrat Barbara Lee. Member of Ways & Means.
1990: 25% F, 26% C Member of Judiciary; 1990: 100% F, 100% C
1989: 62% F, 70% C Transportation; Ways & 1989: 100% F, 100% C
1988: 60% F, 73% C Means. 1988: 100% F, 95% C
1990: 95% F, 100% C
For several years, Norm Water: 9. Filante, William (R) 1989: 100% F, 97% C 17. Brown, Willie L. (D)
(D-7) has maintained the lowest Ophthalmologist 1988: 100% F Attorney
environmental score of any Elected in 1978. Elected in 1964, Assembly
Assembly Democrat. After Member of Housing & 14. Klehs, Johan (D) Speaker since 1980.
repeating his poor performance in Community Development; Full- time legislator’ 1990: 95% F
1990, Waters was defeated by Water, Parks & Wildlife. 1989: 100% F.
Republican David Knowles.
Elected in 1982.
1990: 79% F 1988: 92% F
Assembly Roster Page 23
Elected in 1980. Member of Housing & 32. Jones, Bill (R)
Chair of Natural Resources. Community Development; Businessman and rancher
Member of Environmental Local Government. Elected in 1982.
Safety & Toxic Materials; 1990: 93% F Member of Environmental
Government Efficiency & Safety & Toxic Materials;
Corporate Professions. 28. Farr, Sam (D) Ways & ‘ Means.
1990: 100% F, 94% C Full-time legislator 1990: 6% F, 7% C
1989: 100% F, 100% C Elected in 1980. 1989: 57% F, 48% C
1988: 100% F, 100% C Member of Local 1988: 32% F, 46% C
Bill Baker (R-15) earned the Government; Natural
lowest environmental score of 22. Quackenbush, Charles Resources. 33. Harvey, Trite (R)
any Northern California (R) 1990: 95% F, 92% C Full-time legislator
Assembly member. He has also U.S. Army Reserves 1989: 100% F, 100% C Elected in 1986.
earned the lowest environmental Elected in 1986. 1988: 92% F, l00% C Member of Natural
committee s c o r e i n the Member of Public Safety. Resources.
Assembly. 1990: 37% F, 20% C 1990: 5% F, 8% C
1989: 39% F 1989: 29% F, 33% C
1988: 35% 1988: 24% F, 25% C
Full-time legislator 23. Vasconcellos, John (D) 34. Wyman, Phillip (R)
Elected in 1986. Attorney Rancher and attorney
Member of Environmental Elected in 1966. Elected in 1978.
Safety & Toxic Materials; Chair of Ways & Means Member of Water, Parks, &
Transportation. 1990: 100% F, 100% C Wildlife.
1990: 100% F, 100% C 1989: 100% F, 96% C In 1990 Byron Sher (D-21) 1990: 11% F
1989: 100% F, 100% C 1988: 100% F, 96% C continued to provide critical 1989: 21% F
1988: 100% F, 86% C environmental leadership in the 1988: 8% F
24. Cortese, Dominic L. (D) Assembly by introducing bills on
19. Speier, Jacqueline (D) Farmer and businessman false advertising., recycling, 35. O’Connell, Jack (D)
Full-time legislator energy conservation and forestry. Educator
Elected in 1980.
Elected in 1986. Chair of Local Government. Elected in 1982.
Member of Environmental Member of Water, Parks & Member of Ways & Means.
Safety & Toxic Materials; Wildlife. 1990: 95% F, 100% C
Judiciary; Ways & Means. 1990: 89% F 29. Seastrand, Eric (R) 1989: 100% F, 100% C
1990: 95% F, 100% C 1989: 97% F Stockbroker 1988: 88% F, 96% C
1989: 100% F, 96% C 1988: 96% F Elected in 1982. Seastrand
1988: 100% F, 95% C died in June 1990 & has been 36. McClintock, Tom (R)
25. Areias, Rusty (D) replaced by his wife, Full-time legislator
20. Lempert, Ted (D) Dairy Farmer Republican Andrea Elected in 1982, Minority
Attorney Elected in 1982. Seastrand. Whip.
Elected in 1988. Member of Government Member of Ways & Means. Member of Government
Member of Transportation. Efficiency & Corporate 1990: no score Efficiency & Corporate
1990: 95% F Professions; Transportation. 1989: 21% F, 41% C Professions; Judiciary; Public
1989: 100% F 1990: 100% F 1988: 12% F, 37% C Safety.
1989: 92% F 1990: 5% F
21. Sher, Byron (D) 1988: 75% F 30. Costa, Jim (D) 1989: 18% F
Professor of Law Full-time legislator 1988: 15% F, 28% C
26. Johnston, Patrick (D) Elected in 1978.
Full-time legislator Chair of Water, Parks, & 37. Wright, Cathie (R)
Elected in 1980. Johnston Wildlife. Member of Full-time legislator
was elected to the State Housing & Community Elected in 1980.
Senate in 1990. His seat will Development; Member of Environmental
be filled in a special election Transportation; Ways & Safety & Toxic Materials;
held in early 1991. Means. Ways & Means.
Member of Government 1990: 89% F, 57% C 1990: 10% F, 5% C
Efficiency & Corporate 1989: 92% F, 80% C 1989: 17% F, 26% C
Professions; Judiciary; 1988: 89% F, 78% C 1988: 15% F, 20% C
During his first term in the Revenue & Taxation.
Assembly, Ted Lempert (D-20) 1990: 95% F 31. Bronzan, Bruce (D) 38. La Follette, Marion (R)
successfully co-authored the 1989: 97% F Full-time legislator Realtor
strongest oil spill prevention and 1988: 89% F Elected in 1982. Elected in 1980. La Follette
clean-up legislation in the country 1990: 94% F retired in 1990 & has been
(SB 2040). 1989: 100% F replaced by Republican
27. Cannella, Sal (D)
Elected in 1990. 1988: 92% F, 91% C Paula Boland.
Page 24 Assembly Roster
Member of Natural Member of Natural 1989: 100% F
Resources; Water, Parks & Resources. 1988: 88% F
Wildlife. 1990: 100% F, 100% C
1990: 5% F, 0% C 1989: 100% F, 100% C 50. Tucker, Curtis Jr. (D)
1989: 37% F, 57% C 1988: 100% F, 91% C Full-time legislator
1988: 28% F, 45% C Elected in 1988.
46. Roos, Mike (D) Member of Public Safety.
39. Katz, Richard (D) Full-time legislator 1990: 95% F
Full-time legislator Elected in 1977, Speaker Pro 1989: 100% F
Elected in 1980. Tempore. s
Patrick Nolan’ (R-41) 15%
Chair of Transportation. Member of Public Safety; 51. Felando, Gerald (R) environmental floor score put
Member of Environmental Transportation; Ways and Dentist him near the bottom of the
Safety & Toxic Materials; Means. Elected in 1978. Assembly for 1990. But his 0%
Water, Parks & Wildlife. 1990: 90% F, 92% C Member of Ways & Means. committee score dropped his
1990: 100% F, 100% C 1989: 97% F, 100% C 1990: 35% F, 27% C overall record to new depths.
1989: 100% F, 100% C 1988: 92% F, 89% C 1989: 64% F, 62% C
1989: 100% F, 100% C 1988: 19% F
Member of Revenue &
40. Bane, Tom (D) 52. Hill, Frank (R) Taxation.
Full-time legislator Businessman 1990: 95% F
Assemblymember 1958-64, Elected in 1982. Hill was 1989: 92% F
Re-elected in 1974. elected to the State Senate in 1988: 83% F
Member of Housing & 1990 & has been replaced by
Community Development. Republican Paul Horcher. 58. Brown, Dennis (R)
1990: 95% F Member of Ways & Means. Investment banker
1989: 96% F 1990: no score Elected in 1978. Brown
1988: 87% F 1989: 55% F, 63% C retired in 1990 & has been
After e a r n i n g a n 18% 1988: 58% F, 56% C replaced by Republican Tom
41. Nolan, Patrick (R) environmental score in 1989 and Mays.
Attorney 15% in 1988, Tom McClintock Member of Ways & Means.
(R-36) scraped the bottom of the
53. Floyd, Richard (D)
Elected in 1978. Full-time legislator 1990: no score
barrel in 1990 with a 5%
Member of Ways & Means. Assembly Floor score. Elected in 1980. 1989: 11% F, 7% C
1990: 15% F, 0% C 1990: 88% F 1988: 4% F, 13% C
1989: 21% F, 48% C 1989: 78% F
1988: 11% F 47. Hughes, Theresa (D) 59. Calderon, Charles (D)
Full-time legislator 1988: 85% F
Attorney
42. Mountjoy, Richard (R) Elected in 1975. Elected in 1982. Calderon,
54. Murray, Willard (D)
General contractor Member of Housing & was elected, to the State
Full-time legislator
Elected in 1978. Community Development. Senate in 1990 & has been
Elected in 1988.
1990: 26% F 1990: 95% F replaced by Democrat Xavier
Member of Local
1989: 17% F 1989: 100% F Becerra.
Government.
1988: 15% F 1988: 92% F Member of Environmental
1990: 95% F
1989: 85% F, 80% C Safety & Toxic Materials;
43. Friedman, Terry (D) 48. Waters, Maxine (D) Housing & Community
Attorney Full-time legislator
55. Polanco, Richard (D) Development; Natural
Elected in 1986. Elected in 1976. Waters was
Full-time legislator Resources.
Member of Judiciary; elected to Congress in 1990
Elected in 1986. 1990: no score
Natural Resources; Public & has been replaced by
Member of Ways & Means. 1989: 96% F, 95% C
Safety; Ways & Means. Democrat Marguerite 1988: 74% F
1990: 94% F
1990: 100% F, 100% C Archie-Hudson.
1989: 96% F, 100% C
1989: 100% F, 100% C Member of Judiciary; Natural
1988: 89% F, 84% C
1988: 100% F, 100% C Resources; Ways & Means.
1990: 93% F, 95% C
56. Roybal-Allard, Lucille.
44. Hayden, Tom (D) 1989: 100% F, 100% C
1988: 96% F, 96% C (D)
Consumer advocate & author Full-time legislator
Elected in 1982. Elected in 1987.
Member of Environmental 49. Moore, Gwen (D) Member of Transportation;
Safety & Toxic Materials. Full-time legislator Ways & Means.
1990: 100% F Elected in 1978, Majority
1990: 100% F, 100% C Since he was elected in 1986,
1989: 100% F, 100% C Whip.
1989: 100% F, 100% C Terry Friedman (D-43) has
1988: 100% F, 100% C Member of Government
1988: 100% F earned perfect environmental
Efficiency & Corporate scores on the floor and in
45. Margolin, Burt (D) Professions; Local 57. Elder, Dave (D) Committee. In 1990 he also
Full-time legislator Government. Budget analyst introduced several important
Elected in 1982. 1990: 95% F Elected in 1978. environmental bills.
Assembly Roster Page 25
60. Tanner, Sally (D) State Senate & has been 72. Pringle, Curt (R) Member of Housing &
Full-time legislator replaced in the Assembly by Businessman Community Development.
Elected in 1978. Republican Jim Brulte. Elected in 1988. Pringle lost 1990: 28% F
Chair of Environmental Member of Environmental his seat in 1990 to Democrat
Safety & Toxic Materials. Safety & Toxic Materials Tom Umberg. 77. Bentley, Carol (R)
Member of Natural Revenue & Taxation. Member of Local Full- time legislator
Resources. 1990: 35% F Government; Revenue & Elected in 1988.
1990: 94% F, 92% C 1989: 55% F, 50% C Taxation. Member of Government
1989: 100% F, 95% C 1988: 40% F, 33% C 1990: 10% F Efficiency & Corporate
1988: 82% F 1989: 29% F Professions; Public Safety.
66. Eaves, Gerald (D) 1990: 13% F
Full-time legislator 73. Kelley, David G. (R) 1989: 26% F
Elected in 1984. Citrus rancher
Member of Transportation. Elected in 1978. 78. Marston, Jeff (R)
1990: 89% F Member of Environmental Full-time legislator
1989: 89% F Safety & Toxic Materials; Marston was elected to this
1988: 68% F Water, Parks & Wildlife. seat in a June 1990 special
1990: 26% F, 0% C election. He replaced Lucy
67. Lewis, John (R) 1989: 24% F, 20% C Killea who was elected to the
Businessman 1988: 11% F, 25% C State Senate. However,
Elected in 1980. Marston lost his seat in the
Member of Revenue & 74. Frazee, Robert (R) November 1990 election to
Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-56) Taxation. Businessman Democrat Mike Gotch.
has maintained a perfect 1990: 11% F Elected in 1978. Member of Revenue &
environmental score on the 1989: 7% F Member of Local Taxation.
floor and in committee since she 1988: 4% F, 16%C Government; Natural 1990: 83% F
was elected in 1987. She has Resources; Water, Parks &
also authored important air 68. Clute, Steve (D) Wildlife. 79. Chacon, Peter (D)
toxics legislation. Full-time legislator 1990: 22% F, 7% C Educator
Elected in 1982. 1989: 36% F, 63% C Elected in 1970.
Member of Transportation; 1988: 22% F Member of Government
61. Woodruff, Paul (R) Ways & Means. Efficiency & Corporate
Businessman 1990: 60% F, 73% C 75. Mojonnier, Sunny (R) Professions; Housing &
Elected in 1988. 1989: 100% F Flower grower/shipper Community Development.
Member of Transportation. 1988: 85% F Elected in 1982. Mojonnier 1990: 93% F
1990: 24% F lost her seat in 1990 to 1989: 92% F
1989: 21% F 69. Frizzelle, Nolan (R) Democrat Deirdre Alpert. 1988: 92% F
Optometrist Member of Ways & Means;
62. Lancaster, William (R) Elected in 1980. Judiciary. 80. Peace, Steve (D)
Full-time legislator Member of Natural 1990: 26% F, 8% C Businessman
Elected in 1972. Resources; Ways & Means. 1989: 38% F, 50% C Elected in 1982.
Member of Local 1990: 17% F, 0% C 1988: 27% F Member of Revenue &
Government; Transportation. 1989: 14% F, 30% C Taxation; Water, Parks &
1990: 37% F 1988: 11% F 76. Hunter Tricia (R) Wildlife; Ways & Means.
1989: 37% F Nurse 1990: 95% F, 88% C
l988: 29% F 70. Ferguson, Gil (R) Elected in 1989. 1989: 81% F
Full-time legislator 1988: 67% F
63. Epple, Bob (D) Elected in 1984.
Attorney & tax consultant Member of Housing &
Elected in 1988. Community Development;
1990: 94% F Local Government;
1989: 100% F Transportation.
1990: 17% F
64. Johnson, Ross (R) 1989: 11% F, 29% C
Full-time legislator 1988: 18% F, 36% C
Elected in 1978. Minority
Floor Leader. 71. Allen, Doris (R)
1990: 0% F Businessswoman With his 0% environmental score
1989: 13% F Elected in 1982. Ross Johnson (R-64) is the only
1988: 10% F, 52% C Member of Environmental legislator to vote against every
Safety & Toxic Materials. single environmental bill that
65. Bader, Charles (R) 1990: 35% F CLCV tracked on the Assembly
Businessman 1989: 38% F, 0% C Floor.
Elected in 1982. Balker 1988: 46% F
failed in his 1990 bid for
Page 26 Assembly Roster
Senate Roster
Below is a district-order listing of State Senate Members during the 1990 Legislative session. The description for each
Senate Member includes a listing of their environmental committee assignment(s), and a brief history of their
environmental scores on the floor (F) and in committee (C). State Senators are up for re-election every 4 years, To
contact your Senator about his or her environmental voting record please write to:
Senator
California State Senate
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814
1. Doolittle, John (R) Elected in 1978. Nielsen lost 8. Kopp, Quentin (I)
Attorney his seat in 1990 to Democrat Attorney
Elected in 1980. Doolittle Mike Thompson. Elected in 1986.
was elected to Congress in Member of Agriculture & Chair of Transportation.
1990. His seat will be filled Water Resources; Member of Housing & Urban
in a special election in early Appropriations; Natural Affairs; Local Government;
1991. Resources & Wildlife; Toxics Revenue & Taxation; Toxics
Member of Agriculture & & Public Safety Management. & Public Safety.
Water Resources; Business & 1990: 38% F, 37% C 1990: 76% F, 87% C Art Torres (D-24) was the only
Professions; Judiciary. 1989: 68% F, 62% C 1989: 95% F, 100% C Senator to earn a 1 0 0 %
1990: 12% F, 14% C 1988: 68% F, 60% C 1988: 90% F, 86% C environmental score on the floor
1989: 61% F and in committee.
1988: 44% F 5. Garamendi, John (D) 9. Petris, Nicholas C. (D)
Rancher/Businessman Attorney 1990: 100% F, 75% C
2. Keene, Barry (D) Elected in 1976. Garamendi Elected in 1967. 1989: 90% F, 90% C
Attorney was elected State Insurance Member of Judiciary; 1988: 95% F, 100% C
Elected in 1978, Majority Commissioner in 1990 & has Revenue & Taxation.
Floor Leader. been replaced by Assembly 1990: 88% F 13. Alquist, Alfred (D)
Member of Judiciary; member Patrick- Johnston. 1989: 100% F Full-time legislator
Business & Professions. Chair of Revenue & 1988: 100% F Elected in 1966.
1990: No F score, 80% C Taxation. Member of Member of Appropriations;
1989: 100% F Bonded Indebtedness & 10. Lockyer, Bill (D) Bonded Indebtedness &
1988: 95% F, 100% C Methods of Finance; Natural Full-time legislator Methods of Finance..
Resources & Wildlife. Elected in 1982. 1990: 87% F, 78% C
3. Marks, Milton (D) 1990: 93% F, 33% C Chair of Judiciary. Member 1989: 93% F, 100% C
Attorney 1989: 87% F, 92% C of Appropriations; Revenue 1988: 95% F, 94% C
Elected in 1967. 1988: 100% F & Taxation; Toxics & Public
Member of Business & Safety. 14. Maddy, Ken (R)
Professions; Housing & _ 6. Greene, Leroy (D) 1990: 88% F, 87% C Attorney
Urban Affairs; Judiciary; Civil engineer 1989: 95% F, 100% C Elected in 1979, Minority
Natural Resources & Wildlife. Elected in 1982. 1988: 100% F, 100% C Floor Leader.
1990: 88% F, 83% C Chair of Housing & Urban 1990: 35%
1989: 100% F, 94% C Affairs. Member of 11. Morgan; Rebecca (R) 1989: 71% F
1988: 91% F, 100% C Appropriations; Business & Full-time legislator 1988: 67% F, 50% C
Professions; Transportation. Elected in 1984.
4. Nielsen, Jim (R) 1990: 83% F, 80% Member of Transportation; 15. Vuich, Rose Ann (D)
Farmer & consultant 1989: 95% F Revenue & Taxation. Farmer/ accountant
1988: 95% F 1990: 27% F Elected in 1976.
1989: 75% F Member of Agriculture &
7. Boatwright, Daniel (D) 1988: 75% F Water Resources;
Attorney Transportation.
Elected in 1980. 12. McCorquodale, Dan (D) 1990: 57% F
Chair of Bonded Full-time legislator 1989: 80% F
Indebtedness & Methods of Elected in 1982. 1988: 81% F
Finance; Business & Chair of Natural Resources &
Professions. Member of Wildlife. Vice Chair of 16. Rogers, Don (R)
Revenue & Taxation. Transportation. Member of Geological consultant
Don Rogers (R-16) earned 1990: 85% F Agriculture & Water Elected in 1986.
both the lowest floor score 1989: 94% F, 90% C Resources; Business & Member of Agriculture &
(12%) a n d t h e l o w e s t 1988: 94% F, 100% C Professions; Local
committee score (0%) in 1990. Water Resources; Bonded
Government.
Senate Roster Page 27
Indebtedness & Methods of Elected in 1971, President 1989: 67% F, 75% C Member of Transportation;
Finance; Natural Resources Pro Tempore. 1988: 77% F, 77% C Housing & Urban Affairs;
& Wildlife. Member of Judiciary. Revenue & Taxation.
1990: 12% F, 0% C 1990: 94% F 30. Dills, Ralph C. (D) 1990: 41% F
1989:27% F, 35%C 1989: 95% F Full-time legislator 1989: 60% F
1988: 39% F, 33% C 1988: 95% F Elected in 1966. 1988: 69% F
Bonded Indebtedness &
17. Mello, Henry (D) 24. Torres, Art (D) Methods of Finance. 36. Presley, Robert (D)
Farmer/Businessman Full-time legislator Member of Appropriations. Full-time legislator
Elected in 1980, Dem. Whip. Elected in 1982. 1990: 56% F, 50% C Elected in 1974.
Vice Chair of Agriculture & Chair of Toxics & Public 1989: 80% F, 92% C Chair of Appropriations.
Water Resources. Member of Safety Management. 1988: 84% F, 77% C Member of Agriculture &
Natural Resources & Wildlife. Member of Appropriations; Water Resources; Judiciary;
1990: 87% F Housing & Urban Affairs; 31. Hill, Frank (R) Local Government; Natural
1989: 83% F, 93% C Judiciary. Full-time legislator Resources & Wildlife.
1988: 95% F, 100% C 1990: 100% F, 100% C Assembly Member 1982-89, 1990: 71% F, 62% C
1989: 94% F, l00% C Elected to Senate in 1990. 1989: 90% F, 87% C
18. Hart, Gary (D) 1988: 100% F, 100% C Member of Local 1988: 91% F, 100% C
Educator Government; Bonded
Elected in 1982: 25. Leonard, Bill (R) Indebtedness & Methods of 37. Bergeson, Marion (R)
Vice Chair of Natural Realtor Finance. Full- time legislator
Resources & Wildlife. Assembly Member 1978-88, 1990: 50% F Elected in 1984, Republican
1990: 94% F,83%C Elected to the Senate in 1988. 1989: 55% F, 63% C Whip.
1989: 100% F, 100% C Member of Housing & Urban 1988: 58% F, 56% C Chair of Local Government.
1988: 100% F, 100% C Affairs; Natural Resources & Member of Agriculture &
Wildlife; Transportation; 32. Royce, Edward (R) Water Resources;
19. Davis, Ed (R) Toxics & Public Safety Tax manager Appropriations; Bonded
Full-time legislator Management; Local Elected in 1982. Indebtedness & Methods of
Elected in 1980. Government; Member of Business & Finance; Transportation.
Member of Appropriations; 1990: 24% F, 38% C Professions; Judiciary. 1990: 54% F, 50% C
Judiciary; Natural Resources 1989: 44% F, 47% C 1990: 13% F, 17% C 1989: 63% F, 88% C
& Wildlife; 1988: 7% F, 24% C 1989: 43% F 1988: 74% F
1990: 69% F, 75% C 1988: 65% F
1989:95% F 26. Calderon, Chuck (D) 38. Craven, William (R)
1988: 85% F Full-time legislator 33. Green, Cecil (D) Full-time legislator
Assembly Member 1982-89, Full- time legislator Elected in 1978.
20. Robbins, Alan (D) Elected to Senatein 1990. Elected in 1986. Member of Agriculture &
Attorney Member of Housing & Urban Member of Agriculture & Water Resource; Business &
Elected in 1973. Affairs; Local Government. Water Resources; Local Professions; Local
Member of Transportation. 1990: 71% F Government; Transportation. Government.
1990: 92% F 1984: 96% F, 95% C 1990: 67% F, 60% C 1990: no score
1989: no score 1988: 74% 1989: 82% F, 86% C 1989: no score
1988: 93% F 1988: 90% F 1988: 82% F
27. Greene, Bill (D)
21. Russell, Newton R. (R) Full-time legislator 34. Ayala, Ruben (D) 39. Killea, Lucy (D)
Full-time legislator Elected in 1975. I n s u r a n c e Full-time legislator
Elected in 1974. Member of Revenue & Elected in 1974. Assembly Member 1982-88
Member of Local Taxation. Chair of Agriculture & Water Elected to Senate in 1989.
Government; Transportation. 1990: 82% F Resources. Member of Member of Housing & Urban
1990: 18% F 1989: no score Appropriations; Local Affairs; Transportation;
1989: 60% F 1988: no score Government; Revenue & Toxics & Public Safety.
1988: 55% F Taxation. 1990: 100% F
28. Watson, Diane (D) 1990: 80% F, 60% C 1989: 100% F, 100% C
22. Rosenthal, Herschel (D) Educator/school psychologist 1989: 90% F, 83% C 1988: 89% F, 80% C
Businessman Elected in 1978. 1988: 85% F, l00% C
Elected in 1982. Member of Judiciary. 40. Deddeh, Wadie P. (D)
Member of Toxic & Public 1990: 93% F 35. Seymour, John (R) Full-time legislator
Safety Management. 1989: 100% F Full.- time legislator Elected in 1982.
1990: 100% F 1988: 100% F Elected in 1982. Seymour Member of Appropriations;
1989: 100% F, 100% C was appointed to the United Transportation.
1988: 100% F, 100% C 29. Beverly, Robert G. (R) States Senate in 1990 by 1990: 70% F, 80% C
Attorney Governor Pete Wilson & will 1989: 100% F
23. Roberti, David (D) Elected in 1976. be replaced in the Senate in a 1988: 91% F, 100% C
Attorney Vice Chair of Appropriations. special election in early 1991.
1990: 56% F, 58% C
Page 28