Sponsorship· TaxesCosponsor
Loading figure…
Loading figure…
Kay Granger has voted against supporting democratic institutions in Pakistan and has shown a tendency to restrict U.S. funding to international organizations. She has supported measures to monitor foreign arms transfers and has a generally conservative stance on foreign aid.
Kay Granger has voted against supporting democratic institutions in Pakistan and has shown a tendency to restrict U.S. funding to international organizations. She has supported measures to monitor foreign arms transfers and has a generally conservative stance on foreign aid.
Kay Granger supports stricter immigration policies, including the construction of a border wall and measures to prevent illegal immigration. She has voted in favor of building a fence along the Mexican border and has a mixed record on immigration reform, indicating a preference for sealing the border rather than expanding pathways for legal immigration.
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.
Kay Granger supports stricter immigration policies, including the construction of a border wall and measures to prevent illegal immigration. She has voted in favor of building a fence along the Mexican border and has a mixed record on immigration reform, indicating a preference for sealing the border rather than expanding pathways for legal immigration.
Kay Granger has shifted to an anti-abortion stance, reversing her previous support for abortion rights. She signed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade and has voted for legislation that restricts abortion access, including a bill banning federal funding for abortion with limited exceptions.
Kay Granger has shifted to an anti-abortion stance, reversing her previous support for abortion rights. She signed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade and has voted for legislation that restricts abortion access, including a bill banning federal funding for abortion with limited exceptions.
Kay Granger has a pro-gun rights voting record, having voted in favor of measures that protect gun manufacturers from lawsuits and support concealed carry laws. She has opposed background checks for private firearm transfers, indicating a strong stance against stricter firearms regulation.
Kay Granger has a pro-gun rights voting record, having voted in favor of measures that protect gun manufacturers from lawsuits and support concealed carry laws. She has opposed background checks for private firearm transfers, indicating a strong stance against stricter firearms regulation.
Kay Granger has consistently voted against tax increases and supports tax cuts for corporations and high earners. She has a pro-business voting record, advocating for lower corporate tax rates and opposing tax measures that would increase the tax burden on businesses and individuals.
Kay Granger has consistently voted against tax increases and supports tax cuts for corporations and high earners. She has a pro-business voting record, advocating for lower corporate tax rates and opposing tax measures that would increase the tax burden on businesses and individuals.
Kay Granger supports free trade agreements and has voted in favor of various trade deals, including those with Peru and Australia. She has consistently advocated for policies that promote free trade and lower tariffs, reflecting a pro-trade stance.
Kay Granger supports free trade agreements and has voted in favor of various trade deals, including those with Peru and Australia. She has consistently advocated for policies that promote free trade and lower tariffs, reflecting a pro-trade stance.
Position extraction pending on 7 issues: Climate, Healthcare, Education, School Curriculum, Voting Rights, Criminal Justice, Tech Regulation.
Jan 18, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Cosponsoring the Death Tax Repeal Act directly supports the stated position of advocating for tax cuts and reducing tax burdens on businesses and individuals.
Jul 13, 2017 · Congress.gov
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 187.
Why: Sponsoring the Make America Secure Appropriations Act aligns with her support for strict immigration policies and border security measures.
View source →May 14, 2024 · Congress.gov
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 398.
Why: Cosponsoring the Israel Security Assistance Support Act aligns with her opposition to foreign aid in general, as it specifically supports a strategic ally rather than broader democratic aid.
View source →Jan 31, 2006 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Sponsoring a tax credit act aligns with the support for tax cuts and pro-business policies, as it aims to provide financial incentives for businesses.
View source →Sep 21, 2011 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Why: Sponsoring the Taiwan Airpower Modernization Act indicates support for military aid, which contradicts the stated opposition to foreign aid.
View source →Most are procedural sponsorships or actions on issues where this figure hasn't publicly stated a position. Highest-signal entries shown first.
Oct 11, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The cosponsorship of the Water Delivery Transparency Act does not clearly align with the opposition to foreign aid, as it could be seen as a measure related to aid transparency rather than direct funding.
View source →Oct 8, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The cosponsorship condemns violence and supports a stance against Hamas, but does not directly align with the opposition to foreign aid, leaving the relationship unclear.
View source →Sep 23, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Appropriations.
Why: The action of cosponsoring the Pay Our Troops Act does not directly align with the stated opposition to foreign aid, as it may involve funding related to military support, but the specifics of the bill's provisions are unclear.
View source →Apr 15, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The cosponsorship addresses concerns about terrorism and suppression, which aligns with a conservative stance, but does not directly reflect a position on foreign aid itself.
View source →Feb 28, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The action involves diplomatic efforts related to water treaties, which may not directly align with the broader stance on foreign aid, creating ambiguity in its relationship to the stated opposition.
View source →Feb 5, 2024 · Congress.gov
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 250 - 180 (Roll no. 38).
Why: The action of cosponsoring a supplemental appropriations act for Israel aligns with supporting specific foreign aid but does not contradict her overall opposition to foreign aid, creating a complex relationship.
View source →Jan 9, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: The action relates to tax law conformity but does not directly advance or oppose the stated position on tax cuts or increases, leaving its impact on her pro-business stance unclear.
Dec 6, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The cosponsorship addresses a specific issue related to foreign aid but does not directly align with the broader opposition to foreign aid, creating ambiguity in the relationship.
View source →Nov 1, 2023 · Congress.gov
Cloture motion on the motion to proceed to the measure rendered moot in Senate.
Why: Sponsoring the Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act indicates support for foreign aid in a specific context, while her overall opposition to foreign aid suggests a complex relationship.
View source →Mar 1, 2018 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Why: Sponsoring the act indicates a focus on school safety but does not directly align with or oppose her pro-gun rights stance, leaving the relationship unclear.
View source →May 18, 2017 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The sponsorship of the act suggests some support for foreign aid related to vulnerable populations, but it does not clearly align with the overall opposition to foreign aid.
View source →Jan 31, 2017 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The action involves sponsoring a bill related to foreign aid but specifically for Israel, which does not clearly align with the general opposition to foreign aid as a whole.
View source →Jul 15, 2016 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 537.
Why: The sponsorship of the appropriations act does not clearly align with the stated opposition to foreign aid, as it could include both support and restrictions on funding.
View source →Jun 15, 2015 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 112.
Why: The sponsorship of the appropriations act does not clearly align with the stated opposition to foreign aid, as it could include both support and restrictions on funding.
View source →Jun 27, 2014 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 372.
Why: Sponsoring an appropriations act for foreign operations suggests some support for foreign aid, but her overall opposition to foreign aid complicates the alignment with her stated position.
View source →Apr 10, 2014 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
Why: The action pertains to immigration policy but focuses on foreign entities rather than domestic immigration measures, creating ambiguity in alignment with the stated position.
View source →Mar 4, 2014 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
Why: The sponsorship of the Children in Families First Act does not directly align with strict border security measures, but it also does not contradict her stated support for immigration policies.
View source →Jul 30, 2013 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 133.
Why: Sponsoring an appropriations act for foreign operations indicates some level of support for foreign aid, but her overall opposition to foreign aid complicates the alignment with her stated position.
View source →May 25, 2012 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 347.
Why: Sponsoring an appropriations act for foreign operations indicates some level of support for foreign aid, but her overall opposition to foreign aid complicates the alignment.
View source →Oct 6, 2005 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: The action involves sponsoring a tax credit which could be seen as a tax reduction, but it does not directly align with the broader stance against tax increases or the specific support for corporate tax cuts.
View source →Oct 18, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
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 18, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 11, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House 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 →Sep 23, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 →Jul 8, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House 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 →May 21, 2024 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 624.
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 6, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate and Grid Security.
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 30, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House 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 →Jan 22, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the 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: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Dec 7, 2023 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
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 →Jun 20, 2018 · Congress.gov
Became Public Law No: 115-245.
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 →Mar 2, 2015 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
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 23, 2013 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
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 2, 2011 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 →Mar 3, 2011 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 →Feb 10, 2011 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.
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 →Mar 25, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 →Feb 25, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 →Feb 4, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
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 26, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 →Jul 13, 2006 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 →Jul 13, 2006 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 →Mar 2, 2006 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Education Reform.
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 →May 4, 2005 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
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 →Nov 20, 2024 · 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 →Nov 12, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities, Risk Management, and Credit.
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 25, 2024 · 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 →Sep 23, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
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 25, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, 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 →Jul 24, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 2, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Financial 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 →Jun 27, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, 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 13, 2024 · 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 →Jun 5, 2024 · Congress.gov
Became Public Law No: 118-143.
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 8, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
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, 2024 · 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 →Apr 16, 2024 · 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 →Apr 12, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House 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 29, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, 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 →Feb 29, 2024 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate and 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 →Feb 28, 2024 · Congress.gov
Became Public Law No: 118-40.
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 31, 2024 · Congress.gov
Became Public Law No: 118-161.
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 16, 2024 · 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 →Dec 5, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Financial 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 →Nov 13, 2023 · Congress.gov
Became Public Law No: 118-22.
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, 2023 · Congress.gov
Became Public Law No: 118-15.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 5, 2020 · Congress.gov
On motion to table the measure Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 224 - 193 (Roll no. 38).
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 25, 2018 · 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 →Jul 22, 2015 · Congress.gov
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
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 5, 2013 · Congress.gov
Became Public Law No: 113-116.
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 25, 2010 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
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, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.
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 16, 2006 · Congress.gov
Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from Veterans' 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 →Dec 16, 2005 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology.
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 15, 2005 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
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 26, 2005 · 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 →Apr 13, 2005 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
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.