Sponsorship· AbortionCosponsor
Loading figure…
Loading figure…
Hawley has expressed skepticism towards foreign aid, advocating for a focus on domestic issues rather than international assistance. He has criticized the U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts and has called for a reevaluation of foreign aid policies.
Hawley has expressed skepticism towards foreign aid, advocating for a focus on domestic issues rather than international assistance. He has criticized the U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts and has called for a reevaluation of foreign aid policies.
“We shouldn't attack anybody on behalf of Saudi Arabia for Saudi Arabia's national interests.”
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.
Hawley opposes expanding legal immigration and asylum pathways, advocating instead for stricter border controls and the construction of a wall along the southern border to prevent illegal immigration. He has supported policies that include family separation for illegal border crossers.
Hawley opposes expanding legal immigration and asylum pathways, advocating instead for stricter border controls and the construction of a wall along the southern border to prevent illegal immigration. He has supported policies that include family separation for illegal border crossers.
“Amnesty is not the answer; supports border wall.”
Josh Hawley opposes legal access to abortion, describing Roe v. Wade as "one of the most unjust decisions" in American judicial history. He advocates for the appointment of pro-life judges to the Supreme Court and has expressed his support for legislation that restricts abortion access.
Josh Hawley opposes legal access to abortion, describing Roe v. Wade as "one of the most unjust decisions" in American judicial history. He advocates for the appointment of pro-life judges to the Supreme Court and has expressed his support for legislation that restricts abortion access.
“Roe v. Wade was one of the most unjust decisions.”
Hawley opposes federal action to cut emissions and has criticized climate change policies, arguing they harm the economy. He supports deregulation of environmental protections put in place by previous administrations.
Hawley opposes federal action to cut emissions and has criticized climate change policies, arguing they harm the economy. He supports deregulation of environmental protections put in place by previous administrations.
“Oppose the job-killing climate agenda.”
Hawley supports some gun control measures, including strengthening background checks and banning bump stocks, but he does not support an assault weapons ban. He emphasizes the importance of the Second Amendment and has received high ratings from the NRA.
Hawley supports some gun control measures, including strengthening background checks and banning bump stocks, but he does not support an assault weapons ban. He emphasizes the importance of the Second Amendment and has received high ratings from the NRA.
“Supports background checks but not assault rifle ban.”
Hawley has criticized the Affordable Care Act and has called for its repeal, arguing it is unconstitutional. He supports protections for individuals with preexisting conditions but advocates for a system that does not rely on the ACA.
Hawley has criticized the Affordable Care Act and has called for its repeal, arguing it is unconstitutional. He supports protections for individuals with preexisting conditions but advocates for a system that does not rely on the ACA.
“ObamaCare was never constitutional.”
Hawley supports school choice and has advocated for providing state educational resources to religious schools. He believes that excluding religious schools from educational funding amounts to discrimination.
Hawley supports school choice and has advocated for providing state educational resources to religious schools. He believes that excluding religious schools from educational funding amounts to discrimination.
“Excluding religious school choice amounts to discrimination.”
Hawley has defended strict voter ID requirements and has expressed skepticism about the integrity of the 2020 election, supporting efforts to decertify its results. He has called for a debate on election integrity.
Hawley has defended strict voter ID requirements and has expressed skepticism about the integrity of the 2020 election, supporting efforts to decertify its results. He has called for a debate on election integrity.
“Defended strict Missouri voter ID requirements.”
Hawley has called for the abolition of the World Trade Organization, arguing that it does not serve American interests and has enabled the rise of China. He has supported Trump's tariffs on China, stating that he hopes they will lead to lower tariffs on U.S. agriculture.
Hawley has called for the abolition of the World Trade Organization, arguing that it does not serve American interests and has enabled the rise of China. He has supported Trump's tariffs on China, stating that he hopes they will lead to lower tariffs on U.S. agriculture.
“Calls for abolishing the World Trade Organization.”
Position extraction pending on 4 issues: Taxes, School Curriculum, Criminal Justice, Tech Regulation.
Apr 16, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
“Roe v. Wade was one of the most unjust decisions.”
Why: Cosponsoring the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act directly supports the stated opposition to abortion by seeking to restrict funding for abortion providers.
Mar 27, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 368.
“Amnesty is not the answer; supports border wall.”
Why: Cosponsoring the funding act directly supports the enforcement measures associated with immigration control, aligning closely with the stated opposition to illegal immigration.
View source →Mar 11, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
“Roe v. Wade was one of the most unjust decisions.”
Why: Sponsoring the act directly supports the stated opposition to abortion by aiming to restrict access to chemical abortion methods.
View source →Jan 28, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“Roe v. Wade was one of the most unjust decisions.”
Why: Cosponsoring the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act directly supports the stated opposition to abortion by imposing restrictions on abortion access.
View source →Jan 27, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S292)
“Roe v. Wade was one of the most unjust decisions.”
Why: Cosponsoring the SAVE Moms and Babies Act directly supports the stated opposition to abortion by promoting pro-life policies.
View source →Oct 15, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
“Roe v. Wade was one of the most unjust decisions.”
Why: Sponsoring a bill that prohibits abortion directly advances the stated opposition to abortion, aligning closely with the figure's expressed views.
View source →Mar 26, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
“Calls for abolishing the World Trade Organization.”
Why: Cosponsoring the Buying American Cotton Act supports domestic agriculture and aligns with the opposition to international trade agreements that do not benefit U.S. interests.
View source →Dec 3, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
“Calls for abolishing the World Trade Organization.”
Why: Cosponsoring the act aims to restrict Chinese influence in solar energy, which aligns with the stated opposition to trade practices that do not serve American interests.
View source →Nov 20, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
“ObamaCare was never constitutional.”
Why: Cosponsoring the act aligns with the stated position by promoting protections that could support healthcare providers' rights, moving in a direction consistent with his opposition to the ACA.
View source →Jul 10, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
“Calls for abolishing the World Trade Organization.”
Why: Sponsoring the act suggests a focus on protecting U.S. agriculture from Chinese competition, which aligns with the stated opposition to trade policies that do not serve American interests.
View source →Most are procedural sponsorships or actions on issues where this figure hasn't publicly stated a position. Highest-signal entries shown first.
Apr 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
“ObamaCare was never constitutional.”
Why: The action relates to healthcare but does not directly align with or contradict the opposition to the ACA; it is unclear how the Railroad Retirement Fairness Act impacts his stated position.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
“ObamaCare was never constitutional.”
Why: The action to cosponsor a bill related to Medicare coverage for chiropractic services does not directly align with the opposition to the ACA, but it also does not contradict the stated position on healthcare.
View source →Mar 4, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
“ObamaCare was never constitutional.”
Why: The cosponsorship of the Health Care for Energy Workers Act does not clearly align with the opposition to the ACA, but it also does not directly contradict it, as it may provide targeted support without expanding the ACA framework.
View source →Feb 10, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“ObamaCare was never constitutional.”
Why: The action to cosponsor the Break Up Big Medicine Act does not directly align with the stated opposition to the ACA, but it also does not clearly support or undermine the position on healthcare costs and protections.
View source →Dec 2, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
“Amnesty is not the answer; supports border wall.”
Why: The action relates to immigration vetting and accountability, which has elements that could align with stricter immigration enforcement, but the specifics of the bill and its implications are unclear.
View source →Jul 15, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
“ObamaCare was never constitutional.”
Why: Sponsoring the act indicates some support for Medicaid and rural hospitals, which may align with protecting access to care, but it does not directly support the ACA, which he opposes.
View source →Jun 10, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the 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.
Jun 10, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
“Calls for abolishing the World Trade Organization.”
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 →May 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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 →May 11, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Why: Tagged to Taxes, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Apr 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
“Excluding religious school choice amounts to discrimination.”
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 →Apr 13, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
“Oppose the job-killing climate agenda.”
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 25, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
“Oppose the job-killing climate agenda.”
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 17, 2026 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 404.
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 16, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
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 3, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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 3, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. (text: CR S764)
“Oppose the job-killing climate agenda.”
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 11, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
“Oppose the job-killing climate agenda.”
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 10, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
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 →Feb 4, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
“We shouldn't attack anybody on behalf of Saudi Arabia for Saudi Arabia's national interests.”
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 →Jan 28, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text: CR S347)
“Oppose the job-killing climate agenda.”
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 →Jan 14, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text: CR S8926-8927)
“We shouldn't attack anybody on behalf of Saudi Arabia for Saudi Arabia's national interests.”
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 →Dec 17, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
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 →Dec 17, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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 →Nov 5, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
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 9, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S2929-2930)
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 →Sep 29, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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 →Jul 28, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Why: Tagged to Taxes, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jul 21, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the 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 →Jul 21, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text: CR S4507)
“We shouldn't attack anybody on behalf of Saudi Arabia for Saudi Arabia's national interests.”
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 →Jun 12, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
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 →Jun 10, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
“Excluding religious school choice amounts to discrimination.”
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 →Feb 5, 2025 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 79.
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 →Jun 1, 2026 · Congress.gov
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2480; text: CR S2478-2479)
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 19, 2026 · Congress.gov
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2381; text: CR S2380)
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 13, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the 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 →May 11, 2026 · Congress.gov
Held at the desk.
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 11, 2026 · Congress.gov
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2205; text: CR S2203)
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
Read twice and referred to the 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 17, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
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 25, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
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 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
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 11, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
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 10, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text: CR S960)
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
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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
Read twice and referred to the 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 26, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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 26, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the 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 4, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and 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 15, 2026 · Congress.gov
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S263; text: CR S261)
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, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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 16, 2025 · Congress.gov
Held at the desk.
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 19, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the 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 7, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
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 28, 2025 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 406.
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 27, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
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 22, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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 21, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
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 21, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
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 9, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
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 9, 2025 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
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, 2025 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 309.
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.