Loading bill breakdown…
Loading bill breakdown…
Sponsored by Rep. Gabe Evans (R-CO) · 3 active : 2 Republicans, 1 Democrat
Latest action: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Fire Improvement and Reforming Exceptional Events Act or the FIRE Act
This bill modifies the definition of exceptional events under the Clean Air Act and requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to revise its regulations regarding exceptional events or actions to mitigate wildfire risk.
Generally, the EPA must exclude data from use in determinations of exceedances and violations of national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) if a state demonstrates that an exceptional event caused a specific air pollution concentration.
The bill provides that events caused by human activity that are intended to mirror the occurrence or reoccurrence of a natural event are exceptional events. Additionally, the bill no longer excludes from consideration as an exceptional event (1) meteorological events involving high temperatures or a lack of precipitation, or (2) stagnation of air masses that does not ordinarily occur.
The bill requires the EPA to revise regulations regarding the reviewing and handling of air quality monitoring data influenced by actions to mitigate wildfire risk.
The bill also requires the EPA to conduct regional modeling and analysis when multiple states submit petitions regarding the same exceptional event or action to mitigate wildfire risk.
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 | 55 | 6 | 11% |
| Middle | 225 | 2 | 1% |
| Entrenched | 136 | 1 | 1% |
| Insufficient data |
Members fall into . All 433 representatives have enough data to score. Non-voting delegates are not counted. The bill is not before the House right now; these scores show where members would stand.
: only movement toward the other party counts, so members who sit further from the center than their party no longer score as swing votes.
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
| 2 |
| 0 |
| 0% |
| All voting members | 418 | 9 | 2% |
|---|
: Pair any member who broke with one who stayed with their party: in 85% of those pairs, the one who broke had the higher swing score before the vote. Chance would be 50%.
Projections from swing-v3-dir, computed with data from before the vote. Present and not voting never count as breaking.
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 4 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 27.0 (needs 5.0).