Sponsorship· Foreign AidSponsor
Loading figure…
Loading figure…
Lindsey Graham supports a strong U.S. foreign aid policy, particularly in relation to military assistance to allies. He has advocated for continued support for Israel and has been involved in discussions about U.S. military presence in various regions, including the Middle East.
Lindsey Graham supports a strong U.S. foreign aid policy, particularly in relation to military assistance to allies. He has advocated for continued support for Israel and has been involved in discussions about U.S. military presence in various regions, including the Middle East.
“Vigorous support for State of Israel against Hamas in Gaza. (Nov 2012)”
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.
Lindsey Graham has historically supported comprehensive immigration reform, advocating for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants while emphasizing the need for border security. He has also proposed changes to asylum laws and increased legal immigration pathways.
Lindsey Graham has historically supported comprehensive immigration reform, advocating for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants while emphasizing the need for border security. He has also proposed changes to asylum laws and increased legal immigration pathways.
“We need more legal immigration. (Sep 2015)”
Lindsey Graham has consistently advocated for restrictions on abortion, sponsoring legislation to ban it after 20 weeks of gestation. He has expressed that the issue should be left to the states, but also introduced a federal ban on abortion after 15 weeks, indicating a desire for a national minimum standard.
Lindsey Graham has consistently advocated for restrictions on abortion, sponsoring legislation to ban it after 20 weeks of gestation. He has expressed that the issue should be left to the states, but also introduced a federal ban on abortion after 15 weeks, indicating a desire for a national minimum standard.
“Pro-life, with exceptions for rape, incest, & maternal life. (Jun 2015)”
Lindsey Graham has shown a mixed approach to climate change. He initially supported climate legislation but later withdrew his support, expressing skepticism about the science of climate change and opposing extensive federal regulations. However, he has also sponsored legislation aimed at facilitating carbon credit trading for farmers.
Lindsey Graham has shown a mixed approach to climate change. He initially supported climate legislation but later withdrew his support, expressing skepticism about the science of climate change and opposing extensive federal regulations. However, he has also sponsored legislation aimed at facilitating carbon credit trading for farmers.
“I'm no scientist, but 90% of them say climate change is real. (Oct 2015)”
Lindsey Graham opposes stricter gun regulations, including universal background checks, which he argues would lead to gun registration. He has supported legislation aimed at closing loopholes in existing laws but remains a strong advocate for gun rights.
Lindsey Graham opposes stricter gun regulations, including universal background checks, which he argues would lead to gun registration. He has supported legislation aimed at closing loopholes in existing laws but remains a strong advocate for gun rights.
“Rated A by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Dec 2003)”
Lindsey Graham has been a vocal opponent of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and has advocated for its repeal. He has proposed legislation that would allow states to remove protections for individuals with preexisting conditions, reflecting a preference for less federal involvement in healthcare.
Lindsey Graham has been a vocal opponent of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and has advocated for its repeal. He has proposed legislation that would allow states to remove protections for individuals with preexisting conditions, reflecting a preference for less federal involvement in healthcare.
“Oppose ObamaCare but don't shut down government for that. (Sep 2015)”
Lindsey Graham supports tax cuts and has opposed higher taxes on corporations and top earners, advocating for a simplified tax code and lower rates. He has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, committing to not raise taxes.
Lindsey Graham supports tax cuts and has opposed higher taxes on corporations and top earners, advocating for a simplified tax code and lower rates. He has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, committing to not raise taxes.
“Supports the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. (Jan 2012)”
Lindsey Graham supports school choice and has criticized federal education standards like Common Core. He has advocated for increased funding for military service eligibility for homeschool graduates and supports teaching abstinence in sex education.
Lindsey Graham supports school choice and has criticized federal education standards like Common Core. He has advocated for increased funding for military service eligibility for homeschool graduates and supports teaching abstinence in sex education.
“Sex education about abstinence, not contraception. (Oct 2014)”
Lindsey Graham supports stricter voting laws, including voter ID requirements and limiting mail-in voting. He has been involved in efforts to pass legislation aimed at securing election integrity.
Lindsey Graham supports stricter voting laws, including voter ID requirements and limiting mail-in voting. He has been involved in efforts to pass legislation aimed at securing election integrity.
“ALL VOTERS MUST SHOW PHOTO I.D. (IDENTIFICATION!). (Jun 2025)”
Lindsey Graham supports free trade policies but has also expressed concerns about unfair trade practices, particularly from countries like China. He has advocated for measures to protect American industries from unfair competition.
Lindsey Graham supports free trade policies but has also expressed concerns about unfair trade practices, particularly from countries like China. He has advocated for measures to protect American industries from unfair competition.
“China has more to lose in trade war than US. (Jul 2018)”
Position extraction pending on 3 issues: School Curriculum, Criminal Justice, Tech Regulation.
Jan 29, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
“Vigorous support for State of Israel against Hamas in Gaza. (Nov 2012)”
Why: Sponsoring the Save the Kurds Act directly supports military assistance to allies, aligning with the stated position on foreign aid.
Jun 2, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
“ALL VOTERS MUST SHOW PHOTO I.D. (IDENTIFICATION!). (Jun 2025)”
Why: The bill aims to enhance election security, which aligns with the stated position of supporting stricter voting laws, though it does not directly address voter ID or mail-in voting.
View source →Apr 13, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
“China has more to lose in trade war than US. (Jul 2018)”
Why: Cosponsoring the Buying American Cotton Act suggests a focus on protecting American industries, which aligns with the stated position of supporting free trade while addressing unfair competition.
View source →Mar 11, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
“Vigorous support for State of Israel against Hamas in Gaza. (Nov 2012)”
Why: Cosponsoring the STAND with Taiwan Act indicates support for military assistance to an ally, aligning with the stated position on foreign aid.
View source →Apr 22, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“We need more legal immigration. (Sep 2015)”
Why: Cosponsoring the Sanctuary City Elimination Act directly contradicts the support for comprehensive immigration reform and pathways to citizenship, as it seeks to eliminate protections for undocumented immigrants.
View source →Apr 16, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“Pro-life, with exceptions for rape, incest, & maternal life. (Jun 2015)”
Why: Cosponsoring a bill aimed at preventing abortions contradicts the stated support for abortion rights, as it seeks to impose federal restrictions.
View source →May 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“We need more legal immigration. (Sep 2015)”
Why: Cosponsoring a bill that mandates E-Verify could hinder pathways to citizenship by increasing barriers for undocumented immigrants, which contradicts the support for comprehensive immigration reform.
View source →Apr 28, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“We need more legal immigration. (Sep 2015)”
Why: Cosponsoring the 287(g) Expansion Act, which enhances local law enforcement's immigration enforcement powers, moves against the stated support for comprehensive reform and pathways to citizenship.
View source →Feb 9, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 318.
“We need more legal immigration. (Sep 2015)”
Why: Sponsoring the End Sanctuary Cities Act moves against the stated support for comprehensive immigration reform by targeting local policies that protect undocumented immigrants.
View source →Most are procedural sponsorships or actions on issues where this figure hasn't publicly stated a position. Highest-signal entries shown first.
Jun 3, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“Rated A by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Dec 2003)”
Why: The action focuses on enhancing penalties for firearm theft, which does not directly align with the stated opposition to background checks, but it does not contradict the overall stance on gun policy either.
View source →May 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
“We need more legal immigration. (Sep 2015)”
Why: The Secure America Act includes elements of both stricter border security and pathways to citizenship, creating ambiguity in its alignment with the stated support for comprehensive reform.
View source →May 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“We need more legal immigration. (Sep 2015)”
Why: The action involves cosponsoring a bill related to detention authority, which does not clearly align with or contradict the broader support for comprehensive immigration reform and pathways to citizenship.
View source →May 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 411.
“Oppose ObamaCare but don't shut down government for that. (Sep 2015)”
Why: The action addresses a specific healthcare issue related to PTSD but does not directly align with the broader opposition to the Affordable Care Act or the stated position on healthcare reform.
View source →Jan 29, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
“We need more legal immigration. (Sep 2015)”
Why: The bill addresses immigration law enforcement but does not directly advance pathways to citizenship or comprehensive reform, creating ambiguity in alignment with the stated position.
View source →Jan 8, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
“I'm no scientist, but 90% of them say climate change is real. (Oct 2015)”
Why: The act aims to address energy affordability and investment, which could relate to climate measures, but the overall impact and alignment with the stated skepticism about regulations create ambiguity.
View source →Dec 17, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
“Vigorous support for State of Israel against Hamas in Gaza. (Nov 2012)”
Why: The resolution addresses foreign policy and sanctions but does not directly advance military assistance or support for allies, leading to unclear alignment with the stated position.
Jun 9, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
“Sex education about abstinence, not contraception. (Oct 2014)”
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 13, 2026 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 416.
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 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 410.
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 11, 2026 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 414.
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 11, 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 →Apr 30, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
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 →Apr 28, 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 26, 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 26, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
“Supports the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. (Jan 2012)”
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 →Mar 17, 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 →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 →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 S2351; text: CR S2379-2380)
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 18, 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 14, 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 →May 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 412.
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 30, 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 →Apr 30, 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 29, 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 →Apr 28, 2026 · Congress.gov
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2076-2077; text: CR S2086)
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 27, 2026 · Congress.gov
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2057; text: CR S2056)
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 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Committee on the Budget. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
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, 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 13, 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 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 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S1051; text: CR S1051)
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 the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 347.
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 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian 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 4, 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 →Feb 3, 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 →Oct 29, 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 →Oct 21, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on the Budget. (text: CR S7188)
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
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 →
Discussion
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion.
Sign in to join the discussion.