Loading bill breakdown…
Loading bill breakdown…
Sponsored by Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-AR) · 14 active : 7 Republicans, 7 Democrats
Latest action: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development Act or the SPEED Act
This bill limits the scope of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and modifies the environmental review of major federal actions under NEPA to generally limit the number of federal actions that trigger NEPA review and to expedite the review process.
For example, the bill redefines
major federal actions
, including to specify that an agency may not determine that an action is a major federal action based solely on the provision of federal funds.
It also excludes from the requirement for NEPA review certain proposed agency actions that have already been reviewed under another federal, state, or tribal environmental review statute that meets the requirements of NEPA.
The bill directs an agency, when preparing an environmental document for a proposed agency action, to consider only those effects proximately caused by the immediate project or action under consideration. Agencies may not consider effects that are speculative, attenuated from the project or action, separate in time or place from the project or action, or in relation to separate projects or actions.
The bill modifies the requirement for agencies to prepare an environmental assessment to apply to agency actions that are not likely to have a reasonably foreseeable significant effect on the quality of the human environment. (Currently, the requirement only applies to actions that do not have such an effect.)
The bill makes a variety of other modifications to NEPA, including by limiting judicial review of NEPA cases.
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 | 26 | 1 | 4% |
| Middle | 192 | 3 | 2% |
| Entrenched | 195 | 8 | 4% |
| All |
Members fall into . 2 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, . 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
| 413 |
| 12 |
| 3% |
: Pair any member who broke with one who stayed with their party: in 36% of those pairs, the one who broke had the higher swing score before the vote. Chance would be 50%.
Projections from swing-v2, 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 15 sponsor and cosponsors in the House: they have already committed, so they score as entrenched. 2 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 30.5 (needs 5.0).
