Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Congress is busy with under-the-radar bipartisan legislation

US Capitol

A GovTrack study found that Congress has passed a number of important bills with bipartisan support.

Samuel Corum/Getty Images

West is a staff writer for GovTrack.

From news coverage, one might get the impression that Congress is incapable of passing any laws. Certainly congressional Republicans haven’t done themselves any favors on this front, with constant, public infighting and high-profile, mid-session resignations including that of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who was deposed by the fringe of his party. But is that impression entirely correct?

We at GovTrack analyzed our extensive database and organized the data to see if that impression was correct, and we discovered some compelling information. When we looked at the 56 most substantive bills that were voted on in Congress so far this year (53 of them in the House), nearly two-thirds were passed with bipartisan support.


First, ground rules that we followed: We excluded procedural votes, nomination votes, post office namings, voice/unanimous consent votes and government funding votes. That left us with 56 roll call votes to review. Then, we decided our categories would be party line, slightly bipartisan (some Democrats voting yes, but not many; a total “yes” count of under 300) and very bipartisan (total “yes” votes of over 300, usually by quite a bit).

Our impression that there were lots of very bipartisan votes was correct: 33 of the 56, or 59 percent. There were only 16 slightly bipartisan votes (28 percent) and the smallest category was party-line with only seven votes (12.5 percent).

So what’s going on? There are some areas (examples included) where there’s clearly a broad willingness to work together:

And, surprisingly, the bipartisan list included some so-called authorization bills, which direct how federal agencies should spend money but not how much money they get.

Other bills that passed with significant House support tended to be one-offs: the bill to ban TikTok, a tax policy bill and a bill to allow victims and family of victims of the Pan Am bombing in 1988 to view the court proceedings remotely.

Most of these bills have yet to see Senate action even though many of them fall under traditional government work. Three of the 56 have been enacted:

It is quite possible, now that the government is funded through the end of September, that we’ll see some Senate votes on the other 53.

Even though they’re many fewer in number, what stands out about the bills passed along party lines or with slight bipartisan support is that they’re related to the top issues in the upcoming elections for president and Congress.

These votes include efforts to repeal environmental regulations, establish government funding for anti-abortion messaging on college campuses, increase punishments for immigrants in various ways and the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

While it’s unclear which of these categories will end up with the most bills becoming law, we can at least say that the impression that Congress is entirely dysfunctional is incorrect. It can and does function. How things will go from here is hard to predict, especially with House Republicans’ increasingly shrinking majority thanks to multiple resignations.

Read More

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

President Donald Trump speaks at a White House press briefing on Jan. 30, 2025.

Credit: Jonah Elkowitz/Medill News Service

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

WASHINGTON — Paul Ingrassia withdrew his nomination to lead the Office of Special Counsel on Tuesday night after facing Republican pushback over past controversial statements.

While Ingrassia joins a growing list of President Donald Trump’s nominees who have withdrawn from consideration, many who have aired controversial beliefs or lack requisite qualifications have still been appointed or are still in the nomination process.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making
low light photography of armchairs in front of desk

A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making

The dysfunction of today’s federal government is not simply the product of political division or individual leaders; it is rooted in the internal rules of Congress itself. The Founders, in one of their few major oversights, granted Congress the authority to make its own procedural rules (Article I, Section 5) without establishing any framework for how it should operate. Over time, this blank check has produced a legislative process built to serve partisan power, not public representation.

The result is a Congress that often rewards obstruction and gridlock over compromise and action. The Founders imagined representatives closely tied to their constituents—one member for every 30,000 to 50,000 citizens. Today, that ratio has ballooned to one for every 765,000 in the House, and in the Senate, each member can represent tens of millions (e.g., California). As the population has grown, representation has become distant and impersonal, while procedural rules have tightened the grip of party leadership. Major issues can no longer reach the floor unless the majority party permits it. The link between citizens and decisions has nearly vanished.

Keep ReadingShow less
Lasting peace requires accepting Israel’s right to exist

US President Donald Trump hailed a "tremendous day for the Middle East" as he and regional leaders signed a declaration on Oct. 13, 2025, meant to cement a ceasefire in Gaza, hours after Israel and Hamas exchanged hostages and prisoners. (TNS)

Lasting peace requires accepting Israel’s right to exist

President Trump took a rhetorical victory lap in front of the Israeli parliament Monday. Ignoring his patented departures from the teleprompter, which violated all sorts of valuable norms, it was a speech Trump deserved to give. The ending of the war — even if it’s just a ceasefire — and the release of Israel’s last living hostages is, by itself, a monumental diplomatic accomplishment, and Trump deserves to take a bow.

Much of Trump’s prepared text was forward-looking, calling for a new “golden age” for the Middle East to mirror the one allegedly unfolding here in America. I’m generally skeptical about “golden ages,” here or abroad, and especially leery about any talk about “everlasting peace” in a region that has known “peace” for only a handful of years since the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

Keep ReadingShow less
A child looks into an empty fridge-freezer in a domestic kitchen.

The Trump administration’s suspension of the USDA’s Household Food Security Report halts decades of hunger data tracking.

Getty Images, Catherine Falls Commercial

Trump Gives Up the Fight Against Hunger

A Vanishing Measure of Hunger

Consider a hunger policy director at a state Department of Social Services studying food insecurity data across the state. For years, she has relied on the USDA’s annual Household Food Security Report to identify where hunger is rising, how many families are skipping meals, and how many children go to bed hungry. Those numbers help her target resources and advocate for stronger programs.

Now there is no new data. The survey has been “suspended for review,” officially to allow for a “methodological reassessment” and cost analysis. Critics say the timing and language suggest political motives. It is one of many federal data programs quietly dropped under a Trump executive order on so-called “nonessential statistics,” a phrase that almost parodies itself. Labeling hunger data “nonessential” is like turning off a fire alarm because it makes too much noise; it implies that acknowledging food insecurity is optional and reveals more about the administration’s priorities than reality.

Keep ReadingShow less