This week, I'll be highlighting some of the worst cuts in the Republicans' Interior + Environment FY26 funding bill.
Here's one that likely won't get much attention: a 56% cut to the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, an independent agency that investigates major chemical incidents.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Democrat|Maine District 1
Chellie Pingree
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 550
Yes40%
No55%
Present1%
Not Voting5%
Party align98%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 1
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Chellie Pingree
U.S. RepresentativeDemocratMaine District 1
SoupScore
Chellie's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 22 sponsored · 161 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
SCOTUS just handed Trump unchecked power to gut the Education Dept, threatening $250M/year for Maine schools—without even attempting to justify their decision.
It’s shameful, it’s cowardly, + it further skews our system of checks and balances to serve only one branch of government: the Executive.
I urge my Republican colleagues to come to the table and support the essential work of this subcommittee: protecting public health, conserving our lands and waters, and ensuring every community—from rural Maine to urban centers—has access to a healthy environment and a vibrant cultural life. (7/7)
Any arguments that these irresponsible cuts are somehow fiscally responsible ring hollow in the wake of Republicans adding $3.4 trillion to the national deficit thanks to their disastrous so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill." (6/7)
Cutting the NEA, NEH, and Smithsonian silences artistic expression and undermines the jobs, education programs, and cultural spaces that strengthen towns and cities across the country. (5/7)
It even blocks the EPA from completing its risk assessment on PFAS in sewage sludge—a forever chemical crisis Maine knows all too well.
On top of the environmental attacks, Republicans are taking aim at the arts and cultural institutions that enrich communities and drive local economies. (4/7)
We are still living with the fallout of last year’s failure to negotiate a full-year funding bill. Instead of correcting course, this bill delivers more of the same: it cuts water infrastructure funding, slashes EPA programs, and wipes out environmental justice and climate initiatives. (3/7)
It’s clear House Republicans are once again pushing an agenda that accelerates the climate crisis, upends our National Parks system, and leaves local communities to fend for themselves—all while undermining the power of the Appropriations Committee and of Congress. (2/7)
🧵
Today, House Republicans released their Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies funding bill for FY26.
As expected, it’s a terrible bill. (1/7)
The math isn't mathing. It’s all a bunch of tired talking points and discredited theories masquerading as sound fiscal policy.
This bill will grow the deficit, hamper local economies, jeopardize our financial future, and do unimaginable harm to millions of people.
It's as ugly as it gets. (8/8)
If your policies are forcing millions of people into bankruptcy and credit card debt, jacking up premiums for those with private insurance (thereby forcing them to spend *less* on other things), how the hell is that helping the economy? (7/8)
Which brings us to the second part of the White House’s claim: about how “cutting waste, fraud, and abuse across government” will lead to lower deficits—and a booming economy
Apparently, this means kicking millions people off their health care + slashing SNAP benefits by nearly $200 billion. (6/8)
That theory's been debunked. Both the Bush II and Trump I tax cuts failed to deliver sustained job or wage growth. Both admins ended in economic disaster.
The sad fact is, when you give the super-rich tax breaks, they’d rather spend it on stock buybacks (or hoard it), not hire more people. (5/8)
"by stimulating economic growth” looms pretty large here.
The basic Republican argument—the same one they’ve been making since Reagan—is that lowering taxes on “job-creators” (i.e. millionaires, billionaires and big corporations) will lead to more investment, which in turn creates more jobs. (4/8)
Where are they getting this $2 trillion figure? From the White House Council of Economic Advisors, which is made up entirely of hand-picked "experts."
By contrast, the nonpartisan CBO estimates that that bill will actually *grow* the deficit by $3.4 trillion over 10 years. (3/8)
Here’s what the White House says on their own website:
“The One Big Beautiful Bill reduces deficits by over $2 trillion by increasing economic growth and cutting waste, fraud, and abuse across government programs at an unprecedented rate.” (2/8)
🧵
Of all the outright lies Trump and Republicans have told about their Big Ugly Bill, saying it will lower the deficit might be the most shameless—and the easiest to debunk. (1/8)
Freezing these funds is illegal, unconstitutional, and will harm communities across the country—including here in Maine.
150 of my fellow House Democrats and I are demanding Secretary McMahon release these funds immediately.
On June 30, literally the day before the money was supposed to be released, the Trump Administration announced it was withholding $7 billion in education funding—including $26 million for Maine.
This is money that was supposed to go to after-school programs, teacher training, and adult education.
Rather than working to strengthen our relationship with one of our closest allies and largest trading partners, the president is destabilizing local economies, threatening good-paying jobs, and driving up costs for Mainers who are simply trying to heat their homes and run their businesses.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History550 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
550 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-11-20 | H.R. 6019 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-20 | H.R. 4058 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-20 | H.R. 5107 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-20 | H.R. 5214 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-19 | H. Res. 888 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-11-19 | S.J. Res. 80 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-19 | H.J. Res. 131 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-19 | H.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 888 (119th) | Motion to Refer | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 878 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 879 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 879 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H.R. 4405 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-18 | H. Res. 878 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-11-18 | H.R. 2659 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-17 | H.R. 1608 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-13 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Accept Senate changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-11-12 | H. Res. 873 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-19 | H. Res. 719 (119th) | Approve resolution | PRESENT | YES | — | Passed |
| 2025-09-19 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-19 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-18 | H.R. 1047 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-18 | H.R. 3015 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-18 | H.R. 3062 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H. Res. 713 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H.R. 5143 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H.R. 5125 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H. Res. 722 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-17 | H. Res. 722 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H.R. 5140 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H.R. 4922 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H.R. 2721 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H. Res. 707 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-16 | H. Res. 707 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-15 | H.R. 3400 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-15 | H.J. Res. 117 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-11 | H.R. 3486 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-11 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Instruct negotiators | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.