Fred Upton Gray.png

“I have said many times, and there was a report a couple of weeks ago that in fact you look at this last year, it was the warmest year in the last decade, I think was the numbers that came out. I don’t — I accept that. I do not say that it is man-made.”

-Fred Upton, 2009


On the Record

Fred Upton

Fred Upton

  • Voted against an amendment to H.R. 5538, the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017, which would strike a provision in the bill that would recklessly eliminate any consideration of the Social Cost of Carbon, which is an analysis of the real economic impacts, positive or negative, of the carbon pollution of a project or proposed rule. The Social Cost of Carbon is a critical tool that helps the public and decision makers understand the true benefits and costs of a project and the possible ways to mitigate negative impacts. Requiring an environmental review that prohibits the consideration of climate impacts institutionalizes climate denial into the federal permitting process and forces ill-informed decisions, putting critical infrastructure, taxpayer dollars, and local communities’ health at risk. 

  • Voted against an amendment to H.R. 3826, the Electricity Security and Affordability Act, which would require Congress to accept the scientific findings that man-made carbon pollution contributes to climate change and that climate change has a wide range of negative effects. 2014 was the hottest year on record and communities across the U.S. are already feeling the impacts of climate change, ranging from costly droughts to deadly forest fires to more severe storms. 

  • Voted for the American Energy Solutions for Lower Costs and More American Jobs Act, a package of more than a dozen bills – all of which had already passed the House. H.R. 2 amounts to a huge giveaway to big polluters and threatens the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the landscapes that support our outdoor economy. The bill also thwarts progress on climate change and compromises communities’ ability to weigh in on projects in their own backyards. HR. 2 would gut the EPA’s ability to limit carbon pollution from power plants. It would disregard due process and endanger public health and the environment in order to rush a decision on the dirty and dangerous Keystone XL pipeline. It would also elevate drilling above all other uses on our public lands, including hiking, fishing, and hunting, subverting the multiple uses that have guided public lands management and threatening outdoor recreation-related businesses and communities that depend on this industry.