Sponsorship· ImmigrationSponsor
Loading figure…
Loading figure…
Chair, Foreign Affairs Committee
TX · District 10
McCaul has expressed strong support for U.S. military aid to Ukraine, advocating for increased military assistance and weapons supplies to help Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. He has also supported maintaining U.S. foreign aid to allies.
McCaul has expressed strong support for U.S. military aid to Ukraine, advocating for increased military assistance and weapons supplies to help Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. He has also supported maintaining U.S. foreign aid to allies.
McCaul has supported strict immigration policies, including the construction of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and the Remain in Mexico policy. He has been rated 100% by the U.S. Border Control, indicating a strong stance on border security.
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.
McCaul has supported strict immigration policies, including the construction of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and the Remain in Mexico policy. He has been rated 100% by the U.S. Border Control, indicating a strong stance on border security.
“Rated 100% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance.”
Michael McCaul has consistently voted in favor of restricting access to abortion, including supporting measures to prohibit federal funding for abortion and banning abortions after 20 weeks, except in cases of maternal life. He has been rated 100% by the National Right to Life Committee, indicating a strong pro-life stance.
Michael McCaul has consistently voted in favor of restricting access to abortion, including supporting measures to prohibit federal funding for abortion and banning abortions after 20 weeks, except in cases of maternal life. He has been rated 100% by the National Right to Life Committee, indicating a strong pro-life stance.
“Rated 100% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-life stance.”
Michael McCaul has opposed stricter gun control measures, voting against background checks for private transfers and supporting national concealed carry standards. He has consistently voted to protect gun manufacturers from lawsuits related to gun violence.
Michael McCaul has opposed stricter gun control measures, voting against background checks for private transfers and supporting national concealed carry standards. He has consistently voted to protect gun manufacturers from lawsuits related to gun violence.
“Voted NO on background checks for private transfers.”
Michael McCaul has consistently voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and supports free-market solutions to healthcare. He emphasizes the need for more choices and lower costs without government intervention.
Michael McCaul has consistently voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and supports free-market solutions to healthcare. He emphasizes the need for more choices and lower costs without government intervention.
Michael McCaul supports lowering corporate tax rates and has advocated for a simplified tax code. He has consistently opposed new taxes and has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, committing to not raise taxes.
Michael McCaul supports lowering corporate tax rates and has advocated for a simplified tax code. He has consistently opposed new taxes and has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, committing to not raise taxes.
Michael McCaul has voted in favor of requiring photo ID for voting in federal elections and has opposed measures to expand voter registration and access, indicating a preference for stricter voting regulations.
Michael McCaul has voted in favor of requiring photo ID for voting in federal elections and has opposed measures to expand voter registration and access, indicating a preference for stricter voting regulations.
Michael McCaul has supported free trade agreements, including the implementation of the USMCA and promoting free trade with other countries. He believes in opening markets to create opportunities and spread freedom.
Michael McCaul has supported free trade agreements, including the implementation of the USMCA and promoting free trade with other countries. He believes in opening markets to create opportunities and spread freedom.
Position extraction pending on 5 issues: Climate, Education, School Curriculum, Criminal Justice, Tech Regulation.
Jul 5, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Appropriations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
“Rated 100% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance.”
Why: Sponsoring the Border Security and Enforcement Block Grant Act directly supports strict immigration policies, including border security measures, aligning closely with the stated position.
May 8, 2024 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 43 - 3.
“Rated 100% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance.”
Why: Sponsoring the ENFORCE Act, which aims to strengthen immigration enforcement, directly advances the stated position of supporting strict immigration policies.
View source →May 6, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology.
“Rated 100% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance.”
Why: Sponsoring the Border Security and Enforcement Block Grant Act directly supports strict immigration policies and aligns with the stated position on enhancing border security.
View source →Jun 15, 2023 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 40 - 2.
Why: Sponsoring the REPO for Ukrainians Act directly supports robust military aid to Ukraine, aligning perfectly with the stated position on foreign aid.
View source →Jun 2, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: Cosponsoring the BOOST American Business Act aligns with the support for free trade by promoting American business interests, even though the specific details of the act are not provided.
View source →Apr 15, 2026 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 43 - 1.
Why: Sponsoring the act supports trade regulation improvements, which aligns with the broader commitment to free trade and enhancing trade opportunities.
View source →Mar 30, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Cosponsoring a bill that aims to eliminate taxes on overtime aligns with the stated position of supporting lower taxes, even though it does not directly address corporate tax rates.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
“Rated 100% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance.”
Why: The appropriations act likely includes funding for border security measures, aligning with the support for strict immigration policies.
View source →Jun 30, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: Sponsoring a call for the return of abducted Ukrainian children aligns with supporting Ukraine, as it emphasizes humanitarian concerns within the context of military aid and the ongoing conflict.
View source →Jul 2, 2024 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 43 - 2.
Why: Sponsoring the DFC Modernization and Reauthorization Act supports U.S. foreign aid initiatives, aligning with the position of providing military assistance to Ukraine.
View source →Jan 29, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The action supports international humanitarian efforts, which aligns with the broader commitment to foreign aid, even though it focuses on a different context than military aid to Ukraine.
View source →Oct 10, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: Sponsoring a resolution supporting Israel's defense aligns with the broader commitment to military aid and assistance in foreign conflicts, reflecting a consistent stance on providing support to allies.
View source →Mar 29, 2022 · Congress.gov
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 417.
Why: Sponsoring the act indicates support for accountability related to the Ukraine conflict, which aligns with the stated position of supporting military aid to Ukraine.
View source →Apr 16, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Voting against a resolution to remove U.S. forces from hostilities suggests a divergence from the stated support for robust military aid, as it implies a reluctance to engage in military actions that could be seen as necessary for foreign aid efforts.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
“Rated 100% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance.”
Why: Voting against the appropriations act undermines the support for strict immigration policies, as it may affect funding for border security measures.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Voting against a resolution to remove U.S. forces from unauthorized hostilities contradicts the stated support for robust military aid, as it suggests a reluctance to engage in military actions that could be seen as necessary for U.S. foreign aid commitments.
View source →Feb 10, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Cosponsoring a bill that promotes domestic cotton over foreign imports contradicts the stated support for free trade agreements.
View source →Jul 20, 2022 · Congress.gov
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 102.
Why: Sponsoring a request for documents related to the withdrawal from Afghanistan does not align with the stated support for robust military aid to Ukraine, as it focuses on past withdrawal rather than current aid efforts.
View source →Most are procedural sponsorships or actions on issues where this figure hasn't publicly stated a position. Highest-signal entries shown first.
May 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: While the act addresses foreign aid, it focuses on Tibet rather than military support for Ukraine, creating ambiguity in alignment with the stated position.
View source →Apr 13, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
“Rated 100% by USBC, indicating a sealed-border stance.”
Why: The sponsorship of the BITMAP Authorization Act indicates engagement with border security issues, but the specifics of the act and its alignment with strict immigration policies are unclear.
View source →Apr 9, 2026 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 46 - 0.
Why: The action supports specific healthcare access improvements but does not align with the broader opposition to government intervention in healthcare, creating ambiguity in the relationship.
View source →Mar 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The PORCUPINE Act's specific provisions are unclear, making it difficult to determine its alignment with robust military aid to Ukraine, thus creating ambiguity in the relationship.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, 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: While the action addresses human rights and accountability, it does not directly advance military aid to Ukraine, leaving the relationship between the stated position and the action unclear.
View source →Feb 20, 2026 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 45 - 0.
Why: The action of cosponsoring a reauthorization act for a commission does not directly advance or contradict the stated support for military aid to Ukraine, as it focuses on religious freedom rather than military assistance.
View source →Feb 11, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The action addresses trade by targeting Russian oil profits, but it does not directly advance free trade agreements or the stated position on promoting trade opportunities.
Feb 2, 2026 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 45 - 0.
Why: The action expresses support for U.S. commitments in the Indo-Pacific, which aligns with a broader trade strategy, but does not directly advance free trade agreements.
View source →Jan 14, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The Conflict Prevention Act may relate to foreign aid, but its specific provisions and alignment with military support for Ukraine are unclear from the information provided.
View source →Dec 4, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The action supports democracy and human rights, which aligns with the broader goals of foreign aid, but it does not directly address military aid to Ukraine or the specific support for Ukraine's defense.
View source →Dec 3, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The action addresses human rights violations but does not directly advance military aid or support for Ukraine, creating an unclear relationship with the stated position on foreign aid.
View source →Dec 2, 2025 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 12 - 11.
Why: The CHOICE for Veterans Act aims to improve healthcare access for veterans, which aligns with the desire for more choices, but it does not directly address the broader opposition to government intervention in healthcare.
View source →Oct 28, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: The action addresses foreign aid but focuses on religious persecution in China rather than military support for Ukraine, creating ambiguity in alignment with the stated position.
View source →Oct 10, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Appropriations.
Why: The action of cosponsoring the Pay Our Troops Act does not directly address military aid to Ukraine, leaving the relationship to the stated position unclear.
View source →Sep 30, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The CLEAN Pacific Act focuses on environmental issues rather than military aid, creating uncertainty about its alignment with the stated support for military aid to Ukraine.
View source →Jun 13, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The action expresses support for human rights and cultural protection, which aligns with broader foreign aid principles, but does not directly address military aid or the specific context of Ukraine.
View source →May 16, 2024 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 33 - 13.
Why: The action focuses on military aid to Israel, which aligns with the broader theme of supporting allies, but does not directly address the specific support for Ukraine mentioned in the stated position.
View source →Feb 15, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Why: The act may align with healthcare reform but does not clearly indicate whether it supports or opposes government intervention, leaving the relationship to the stated position ambiguous.
View source →Dec 12, 2023 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 42 - 7.
Why: The sponsorship of the conservation act does not directly align with military aid to Ukraine, as it focuses on environmental issues rather than defense support.
View source →Oct 16, 2023 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Why: The action addresses foreign aid but focuses on restricting funds rather than supporting military aid to Ukraine, creating ambiguity in alignment with the stated position.
View source →Oct 11, 2023 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: The action supports military aid but is focused on Israel rather than Ukraine, creating ambiguity in alignment with the stated position on foreign aid.
View source →Sep 21, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Why: The sponsorship of a bill focused on childhood cancer clinical trials does not directly align with the opposition to the Affordable Care Act, but it also does not contradict it, as it addresses a specific healthcare issue without broader implications for healthcare policy.
View source →Jul 19, 2023 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 49 - 0.
Why: The AUKUS Oversight and Accountability Act relates to military partnerships but does not directly address aid to Ukraine, creating ambiguity in alignment with the stated position.
View source →Jul 11, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: While the action addresses human rights issues relevant to foreign aid, it does not directly advance military support for Ukraine, leading to ambiguity in alignment with the stated position.
View source →Jun 27, 2023 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: The action addresses U.S. foreign policy but does not directly relate to military aid for Ukraine, creating ambiguity in alignment with the stated support for foreign aid.
View source →May 18, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Why: The Bear Protection Act is related to trade through its referral to the Subcommittee on Trade, but it does not directly advance the stated support for free trade agreements.
View source →Feb 17, 2023 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Why: The action involves a report on security partnerships, which is related to foreign aid but does not directly advance military aid to Ukraine as stated.
View source →Feb 8, 2023 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: The action condemns a specific foreign policy issue but does not directly address trade agreements or free trade, leaving the relationship between the stated position and the action unclear.
View source →Sep 28, 2022 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security, Facilitation, and Operations.
Why: Sponsoring the Taiwan Policy Act indicates support for foreign aid, but the specific focus on Taiwan rather than Ukraine creates ambiguity regarding alignment with the stated position on military aid to Ukraine.
View source →Sep 22, 2022 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: The sponsorship of the event promotes global unity and peace, which aligns with broader humanitarian goals, but does not directly advance military aid to Ukraine as stated.
View source →Jul 28, 2022 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
Why: The sponsorship of the Global Catastrophic Risk Management Act does not directly address military aid to Ukraine, leaving the relationship between the action and the stated position unclear.
View source →Apr 28, 2022 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Why: The act focuses on childhood cancer research and support, which aligns with healthcare improvement, but does not directly address the broader opposition to government involvement in healthcare.
View source →Mar 16, 2022 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: The FABS Act's specifics are unclear, making it difficult to determine if it aligns with or contradicts the stated position on taxes; thus, it presents elements of both alignment and divergence.
View source →Apr 14, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Feb 25, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Feb 25, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Tagged to Climate, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Apr 14, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 4, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 4, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 14, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
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
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 43 - 0.
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 →Apr 27, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
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, 2026 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 412.
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 7, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign 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 12, 2025 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate.
Why: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Nov 21, 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 →Nov 9, 2023 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
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 17, 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 →May 15, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, the Judiciary, and Oversight and Accountability, 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 Criminal Justice, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 9, 2023 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
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 24, 2022 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
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 9, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Homeland Security, Transportation and Infrastructure, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 22, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on 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 →May 21, 2026 · 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 →May 15, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 13, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 12, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 7, 2026 · 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 →May 7, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 28, 2026 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 39 - 7.
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 24, 2026 · 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 →Jan 13, 2026 · 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 →Dec 18, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Dec 11, 2025 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 30 - 14.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Dec 11, 2025 · 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 →Dec 9, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Emergency Management 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 →Dec 1, 2025 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 44 - 0.
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
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 44 - 0.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Oct 24, 2025 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Oct 3, 2025 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Sep 30, 2025 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Sep 26, 2025 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 264.
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 18, 2025 · 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 →Jan 22, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Sep 19, 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 →Apr 17, 2024 · Congress.gov
Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 1160, H.R. 8038 is laid on the table.
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, 2023 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Voice Vote.
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 9, 2023 · 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 →Mar 22, 2023 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 30.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2023 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 43.
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 17, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →
Discussion
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion.
Sign in to join the discussion.