Sponsorship· ImmigrationSponsor
Loading figure…
Loading figure…
Chip Roy has shown opposition to maintaining or expanding U.S. foreign aid, advocating for a focus on domestic issues over international assistance. He has voted against measures that would support foreign aid initiatives.
Chip Roy has shown opposition to maintaining or expanding U.S. foreign aid, advocating for a focus on domestic issues over international assistance. He has voted against measures that would support foreign aid initiatives.
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
How do you perceive this figure's political lean?
Community votes: Left 0% · Center 0% · Right 0% (0 votes)
Sign in to cast a vote.
Chip Roy has consistently opposed expanding legal immigration and asylum pathways. He supports strict border control measures, including building a border wall, and has expressed concerns about the high percentage of foreign-born individuals in the U.S., which he views as a threat to American values.
Chip Roy has consistently opposed expanding legal immigration and asylum pathways. He supports strict border control measures, including building a border wall, and has expressed concerns about the high percentage of foreign-born individuals in the U.S., which he views as a threat to American values.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
“Roy has stated that the percentage of the population of the United States in 2024 that is foreign-born is the highest in history, which he views as a threat to western values.”
Chip Roy supports maintaining strong national defense and security capabilities. He has voted against measures that would reduce military funding and has expressed a commitment to a robust military presence.
Chip Roy supports maintaining strong national defense and security capabilities. He has voted against measures that would reduce military funding and has expressed a commitment to a robust military presence.
“Peace maintained via a strong military. (Sep 2018)”
Chip Roy has consistently opposed legal access to abortion, stating that he will always oppose abortion in any form and believes life begins at conception. He has also sponsored legislation aimed at protecting infant survivors of abortion.
Chip Roy has consistently opposed legal access to abortion, stating that he will always oppose abortion in any form and believes life begins at conception. He has also sponsored legislation aimed at protecting infant survivors of abortion.
“Will always oppose abortion in any form. (Nov 2019)”
“Roy has consistently opposed legal access to abortion, stating that he will always oppose abortion in any form.”
Chip Roy opposes federal action to cut emissions and believes that regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. He has voted against measures aimed at assisting renewable energy initiatives.
Chip Roy opposes federal action to cut emissions and believes that regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. He has voted against measures aimed at assisting renewable energy initiatives.
“Regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. (Sep 2018)”
Chip Roy is a strong advocate for gun rights and opposes more restrictive gun control measures. He has received an 'A' rating from the NRA and has voted against background checks for firearm sales, arguing that such measures do not enhance public safety.
Chip Roy is a strong advocate for gun rights and opposes more restrictive gun control measures. He has received an 'A' rating from the NRA and has voted against background checks for firearm sales, arguing that such measures do not enhance public safety.
“More restrictive gun control doesn't protect public safety. (Sep 2018)”
“Roy is an outspoken critic of gun control, having made several speeches in support of gun rights.”
Chip Roy opposes higher taxes on corporations and top earners, advocating for a reduction in the burden of the federal tax code. He believes in simplifying taxes and has stated that he does not support increasing taxes to balance the budget.
Chip Roy opposes higher taxes on corporations and top earners, advocating for a reduction in the burden of the federal tax code. He believes in simplifying taxes and has stated that he does not support increasing taxes to balance the budget.
“Reduce burden of federal tax code. (Nov 2019)”
“Roy has stated he does not support increasing taxes to balance the budget.”
Chip Roy opposes increasing federal funding for public schools, advocating instead for state control over education standards and funding. He believes that bureaucrats should not override political officials in educational matters.
Chip Roy opposes increasing federal funding for public schools, advocating instead for state control over education standards and funding. He believes that bureaucrats should not override political officials in educational matters.
“Bureaucrats should not override political officials. (Oct 2018)”
Chip Roy opposes measures aimed at expanding ballot access, advocating instead for stricter voter registration requirements and opposing same-day registration.
Chip Roy opposes measures aimed at expanding ballot access, advocating instead for stricter voter registration requirements and opposing same-day registration.
“No holiday on election day; no same-day registration. (Mar 2019)”
Chip Roy supports maintaining strict penalties for drug offenses and has expressed a preference for traditional law enforcement approaches rather than reducing criminal penalties for drug offenses.
Chip Roy supports maintaining strict penalties for drug offenses and has expressed a preference for traditional law enforcement approaches rather than reducing criminal penalties for drug offenses.
“Supports the death penalty. (Sep 2018)”
Chip Roy has expressed opposition to expanding federal protections against discrimination, arguing that he believes the focus should be on community and family rather than on race-based legislation. He voted against a bill aimed at expediting the review of COVID-19-related hate crimes, stating that more laws are not necessary to combat hate.
Chip Roy has expressed opposition to expanding federal protections against discrimination, arguing that he believes the focus should be on community and family rather than on race-based legislation. He voted against a bill aimed at expediting the review of COVID-19-related hate crimes, stating that more laws are not necessary to combat hate.
“We can't legislate away hate. (May 2021)”
“Roy voted against a bill that ordered the Department of Justice to expedite the review of COVID-19-related hate crimes, stating that we don't need new laws.”
Position extraction pending on 10 issues: Economy & Jobs, Healthcare, School Curriculum, Trade, Tech Regulation, Elections & Campaigns, Public Health, Drug & Addiction Policy, Religion & Public Life, Disaster Response.
Jul 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 16 - 14.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Sponsoring the Permanent Trump Secure Border Act directly supports strict border control measures and aligns with the stated opposition to expanding legal immigration and asylum pathways.
Jun 8, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Homeland Security, Ways and Means, Foreign Affairs, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Sponsoring a bill focused on securing borders directly aligns with the stated opposition to expanding immigration pathways, reinforcing a stricter immigration system.
View source →Jun 8, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Homeland Security, Ways and Means, and Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Sponsoring a bill focused on securing borders directly aligns with the stated opposition to expanding immigration pathways.
View source →May 7, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
“More restrictive gun control doesn't protect public safety. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Cosponsoring the repeal of the NFA Act directly advances the stated position of opposing restrictive gun control measures.
View source →Apr 30, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
“Reduce burden of federal tax code. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring a bill that aims to eliminate capital gains tax on family farms directly supports the stated position of opposing tax increases and reducing the tax burden.
View source →Mar 26, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Will always oppose abortion in any form. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring the Chloe Cole Act, which aims to protect infants, directly aligns with the stated position of opposing abortion and advocating for life from conception.
View source →Feb 25, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“More restrictive gun control doesn't protect public safety. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Cosponsoring the Gun Owner Registration Information Protection Act aligns directly with the stated position of opposing restrictive gun control measures.
View source →Jan 23, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
“Will always oppose abortion in any form. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring the Protecting Motherhood Act aligns directly with the stated opposition to abortion and advocacy for protecting life, reflecting a clear advancement of the stated position.
View source →Nov 20, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
“Will always oppose abortion in any form. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring a bill that aims to prevent taxpayer funding for abortion travel aligns directly with the stated opposition to abortion and the advocacy for defunding organizations that provide abortion services.
View source →Nov 12, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
“More restrictive gun control doesn't protect public safety. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Cosponsoring the Second Amendment Restoration Act directly supports the stated position of advocating for gun rights and opposing restrictive measures.
View source →Oct 8, 2025 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 477.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring the Expedited Removal of Criminal Aliens Act directly supports the stated position of enforcing immigration laws and prioritizing legal entry.
View source →Mar 27, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring the 287(g) Cooperation Act, which enhances local law enforcement's ability to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, aligns with the stated position of supporting a legal immigration system and addressing illegal immigration.
View source →Feb 25, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring the Stop Illegal Alien Cops Act aligns with the stated position by addressing illegal immigration and reinforcing enforcement measures.
View source →Jan 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring the act aligns with the stated position by reinforcing the idea that non-citizens should not receive welfare, which supports a stricter immigration system.
View source →Nov 17, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring the act aligns with the stated position by focusing on the removal of criminal aliens, which supports stricter enforcement of immigration laws.
View source →May 15, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Sponsoring the State Border Security Assistance Act aligns with the stated position by promoting border security measures, which reflects the advocacy for a system based on American values.
View source →Jan 15, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Cosponsoring a border security reimbursement act aligns with the stated opposition to expanding legal immigration by emphasizing strict border control measures.
View source →Jul 13, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Sponsoring a bill aimed at reporting illegal immigrants for healthcare purposes contradicts the stated opposition to expanding legal immigration and asylum pathways.
View source →May 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Sponsoring a bill that aims to deny housing welfare to illegal immigrants directly contradicts the stated support for a legal immigration system, as it undermines the rights and needs of those seeking to enter the country legally.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: Voting against the appropriations act for the Department of Homeland Security contradicts the support for a system addressing illegal immigration and border security.
View source →Most are procedural sponsorships or actions on issues where this figure hasn't publicly stated a position. Highest-signal entries shown first.
Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The appropriations act may include funding for border security measures, but it does not directly align with the specific advocacy for a border wall or the stance on illegal immigration.
View source →Jul 13, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“We can't legislate away hate. (May 2021)”
Why: The cosponsorship relates to surrogacy and does not directly address civil rights or discrimination, leaving the alignment with the stated opposition unclear.
View source →Jun 4, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The sponsorship of H-1B reform does not directly align with the stated opposition to illegal immigration, as it pertains to legal immigration pathways, creating ambiguity in the relationship.
View source →Apr 30, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The sponsorship of the End U Visa Abuse Act suggests a focus on regulating legal immigration pathways, but does not clearly align with the stated support for a system based on American values and addressing illegal immigration.
View source →Apr 29, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The action addresses visa regulations, which relates to immigration policy, but does not directly align with the stated support for legal pathways for immigrants.
View source →Mar 3, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The One Nation, One Visa Policy Act could align with the stated position by addressing legal immigration pathways, but the specifics of the bill and its implications for illegal immigration are unclear.
View source →Jan 8, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The cosponsorship of the Public Charge Clarification Act does not clearly align with or contradict the stated position, as it addresses immigration policy but lacks direct relevance to the support for a border wall or legal re-entry.
Oct 31, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
“Reduce burden of federal tax code. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The sponsorship of the act does not directly align with the stated opposition to tax increases, but it also does not propose a tax increase; the relationship is unclear without further details on the act's implications.
View source →Aug 19, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The act addresses penalties related to sanctuary policies, which aligns with a focus on illegal immigration, but the overall implications and specific provisions are unclear.
View source →Jun 26, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The sponsorship of the TPS Reform Act suggests a focus on legal immigration pathways, but it does not directly address the opposition to illegal immigration or the call for a border wall.
View source →Jun 26, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Design immigration system based on American values. (Nov 2019)”
Why: The action of sponsoring the End DED Act does not clearly align with the stated position, as it addresses a specific immigration status without directly supporting the broader stance on illegal immigration and border security.
View source →Apr 16, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Apr 14, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
“Regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Feb 25, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
“Regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Feb 25, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
“Regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
“Regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Apr 15, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Recorded Vote — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 14, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 4, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 4, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 25, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
“Regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 22, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
“Regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 19, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 19, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 14, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Apr 9, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Mar 27, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Tagged to Tech Regulation, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Mar 24, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Supports the death penalty. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Criminal Justice, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Mar 19, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
“Regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Mar 19, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Why: Tagged to Trade, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 18 - 13.
“Bureaucrats should not override political officials. (Oct 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Nov 21, 2025 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“Supports the death penalty. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Criminal Justice, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Nov 20, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
“Bureaucrats should not override political officials. (Oct 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Nov 20, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
“Bureaucrats should not override political officials. (Oct 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 28, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, Education and Workforce, Natural Resources, the Judiciary, House Administration, Rules, and Appropriations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Tagged to Healthcare, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 24, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Tagged to Tech Regulation, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 24, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why: Tagged to Healthcare, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 21, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
“Supports the death penalty. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Criminal Justice, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 10, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
“Regulating climate change is not a government responsibility. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 10, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jul 23, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why: Tagged to Public Health, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 9, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why: Tagged to Healthcare, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jan 14, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Foreign Policy, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jan 14, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
“Protect our sovereignty from the United Nations. (Sep 2018)”
Why: Tagged to Foreign Policy, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jul 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 18 - 15.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jul 15, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 10, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 9, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 9, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 4, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 28, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 6, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 27, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation and Maritime Security.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 18, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 9, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 3, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 5, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 2, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 30, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 409.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Dec 11, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Nov 20, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Nov 18, 2025 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Nov 12, 2025 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Nov 4, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Oct 31, 2025 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 35 - 14.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Oct 24, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Oct 17, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Oct 8, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Sep 30, 2025 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Sep 3, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jul 23, 2025 · Congress.gov
On motion to table Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 215 - 207, 2 Present (Roll no. 223).
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jul 23, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 4, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 15, 2025 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 609.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 15, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 14, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →
Discussion
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion.
Sign in to join the discussion.