Sponsorship· National SecurityCosponsor
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.
Granger has consistently supported strong national defense measures, including voting for significant defense appropriations and extending the PATRIOT Act's provisions. She emphasizes the importance of military readiness and intelligence capabilities.
Granger has consistently supported strong national defense measures, including voting for significant defense appropriations and extending the PATRIOT Act's provisions. She emphasizes the importance of military readiness and intelligence capabilities.
Kay Granger has consistently voted against government intervention aimed at economic recovery, including opposing stimulus packages and additional funding for economic support. She has supported prioritizing spending and maintaining existing spending caps.
Kay Granger has consistently voted against government intervention aimed at economic recovery, including opposing stimulus packages and additional funding for economic support. She has supported prioritizing spending and maintaining existing spending caps.
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.
Granger has a history of voting against stronger protections for LGBTQ rights, including voting for constitutional amendments to define marriage as between one man and one woman and against prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Granger has a history of voting against stronger protections for LGBTQ rights, including voting for constitutional amendments to define marriage as between one man and one woman and against prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Position extraction pending on 12 issues: Climate, Healthcare, Education, School Curriculum, Voting Rights, Criminal Justice, Tech Regulation, Elections & Campaigns, Public Health, Drug & Addiction Policy, Religion & Public Life, Disaster Response.
Sep 23, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Appropriations.
Why: Cosponsoring the Pay Our Troops Act directly supports increased funding for military initiatives, aligning clearly with the stated position on national security.
Jan 18, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Cosponsoring a bill to repeal the estate tax directly supports the stated position of opposing higher taxes, as it aims to eliminate a tax burden on estates.
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: Sponsoring the Department of Defense Appropriations Act directly supports increased funding for military initiatives, aligning perfectly with the stated position on national security.
View source →Jul 13, 2017 · Congress.gov
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 187.
Why: Sponsoring a bill that appropriates funding for national security initiatives directly advances the stated position of supporting defense spending and robust national security capabilities.
View source →Apr 13, 2005 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Why: Sponsoring a bill that enhances military pay and supports military programs directly advances the stated position of increasing defense spending and maintaining strong national security capabilities.
View source →Sep 15, 2005 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Why: Sponsoring a bill aimed at assisting military families aligns with the position of supporting defense spending and national security, as it contributes to the welfare of those serving in the military.
View source →Apr 12, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Why: Cosponsoring a bill aimed at supporting LGBTQ service members directly contradicts the stated opposition to civil rights protections for LGBTQ individuals.
View source →Most are procedural sponsorships or actions on issues where this figure hasn't publicly stated a position. Highest-signal entries shown first.
Jan 16, 2024 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: The action condemns violence, which is generally aligned with civil rights, but does not directly address the figure's stated opposition to LGBTQ rights, making the relationship unclear.
View source →Jan 9, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: The measure's content is unclear, making it difficult to determine its alignment with the stated position on taxes.
View source →Mar 4, 2014 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
Why: The measure's content is unclear from the title alone, making it difficult to determine its alignment with the stated position on immigration.
View source →Jan 31, 2006 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: The measure's content is unclear, as it is a tax credit act and does not specify whether it would raise or lower taxes overall, making it difficult to determine its alignment with the stated position.
View source →Oct 6, 2005 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: The measure's content is unclear, as it is a tax credit act and does not directly indicate whether it raises or lowers taxes overall.
View source →Jul 26, 2005 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: The action encourages equal rights for women, which does not directly align with the stated opposition to civil rights protections for LGBTQ individuals, creating ambiguity in alignment.
View source →Nov 12, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities, Risk Management, and Credit.
Why: Tagged to Economy & Jobs, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
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 →Oct 11, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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 →Oct 8, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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 →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 →May 14, 2024 · Congress.gov
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 398.
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 →Apr 15, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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 →Feb 29, 2024 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate and 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 →Feb 28, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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 →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 →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: 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 30, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Tagged to Drug & Addiction Policy, 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 →Dec 6, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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 →Nov 1, 2023 · Congress.gov
Cloture motion on the motion to proceed to the measure rendered moot in Senate.
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 →Mar 1, 2018 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Why: Tagged to School Curriculum, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 18, 2017 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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 31, 2017 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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 15, 2016 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 537.
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 →Jun 15, 2015 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 112.
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 →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 →Jun 27, 2014 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 372.
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 →Apr 10, 2014 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security.
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 30, 2013 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 133.
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 →May 25, 2012 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 347.
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 →Sep 21, 2011 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
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 →Jun 2, 2011 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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 →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 →Sep 30, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.
Why: Tagged to Economy & Jobs, 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 Public Health, 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 →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 →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 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 →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 →Jun 20, 2018 · Congress.gov
Became Public Law No: 115-245.
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 →Oct 23, 2013 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
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 →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 →
Discussion
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion.
Sign in to join the discussion.