Loading bill breakdown…
Loading bill breakdown…
Sponsored by Rep. Julia Letlow (R-LA) · 4 active : 3 Republicans, 1 Democrat
Latest action: Received in the Senate.
Emergency Conservation Program Improvement Act of 2025
This bill revises the Emergency Conservation Program (ECP) and the Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP) to expand eligibility for payments to agricultural producers and owners of forest land impacted by natural disasters. The bill also provides additional options to receive an advance on cost-sharing payments before carrying out emergency measures.
The bill expands advance ECP payments to include payments for the rehabilitation of farmland or to repair or replace a farmland or conservation structure. Producers may receive an advance on cost-sharing payments for 75% of the cost of the replacement or rehabilitation and 50% of the cost of the repair. Current law limits advanced cost-sharing payments to 25% of the cost of the repair or replacement of fencing.
The bill also expands eligibility for payments under ECP to include emergency measures to address damages caused by a wildfire that is not caused naturally (including a wildfire that is caused by the federal government), if the damage is caused by the spread of the wildfire due to natural causes.
Under EFRP, the bill allows owners of nonindustrial private forest land impacted by a natural disaster to receive an advance on cost-sharing payments for up to 75% of the cost of the emergency measures. Recipients must use the funds within 180 days after the funds are disbursed. Currently, advance payments are not available under the program.
Each member’s recorded vote compared with their swing projection from before the vote. A member by voting against most of their own party.
| BandBand before the vote | VotedVoted yea or nay | BrokeBroke with party | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Swing | 37 | 0 | 0% |
| Middle | 244 | 9 | 4% |
| Entrenched | 122 | 1 | 1% |
| All |
Members fall into . 3 representatives don’t have enough data yet and are marked “insufficient data”. Non-voting delegates are not counted. The bill is not before the House right now; these scores show where members would stand.
Bars show each input from 0 to 100: ideology gap, scorecard gap, , and the . is the seat’s partisan lean, and shows how much of the input data a score has. Where the House has voted, each member’s appears with the projection made before it.
Loading similar votes
| 403 |
| 10 |
| 2% |
: Pair any member who broke with one who stayed with their party: in 56% of those pairs, the one who broke had the higher swing score before the vote. Chance would be 50%.
Projections from swing-v3, computed with data from before the vote. Present and not voting never count as breaking.



These members have less than half of the model’s inputs, so their scores are not banded or ranked.



Ringed dots broke with their party on the vote.
Ideology is each member’s score. The cluster low on the chart includes the bill’s 5 sponsor and cosponsors in the House: they have already committed, so they score as entrenched. 3 representatives without a DW-NOMINATE score or with insufficient data are not plotted.
Similar votes count toward swing-v3 in the House: total similarity weight 5.5 (needs 5.0).