Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
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

An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed upon entering the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building on June 6, 2023 in New York City. New York City has provided sanctuary to over 46,000 asylum seekers since 2013, when the city passed a law prohibiting city agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement agencies unless there is a warrant for the person's arrest.(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)
An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed.
(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

The Power of the Purse and Executive Discretion: ICE Expansion Under the Trump Administration

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Core Constitutional Debate: Expanded ICE enforcement under the Trump Administration raises a core constitutional question: Does Article II executive power override Article I’s congressional power of the purse?
  • Executive Justification: The primary constitutional justification for expanded ICE enforcement is The Unitary Executive Theory.
  • Separation of Powers: Critics argue that the Unitary Executive Theory undermines Congress’s power of the purse.
  • Moral Conflict: Expanded ICE enforcement has sparked a moral debate, as concerns over due process and civil liberties clash with claims of increased public safety and national security.

Where is ICE Funding Coming From?

Since the beginning of the current Trump Administration, immigration enforcement has undergone transformative change and become one of the most contested issues in the federal government. On his first day in office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14159, which directs executive agencies to implement stricter immigration enforcement practices. In order to implement these practices, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a budget reconciliation package that paired state and local tax cuts with immigration funding. This allocated $170.7 billion in immigration-related funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spend by 2029.

Keep ReadingShow less
Towards a Reformed Capitalism
oval brown wooden conference table and chairs inside conference room

Towards a Reformed Capitalism

Despite all the laws and regulations that apply to corporations, which for the most part are designed to make corporations more responsive to the greater good, corporations have wreaked great harm on our environment, their workers, their customers, and the general public. Despite all the rules, capitalism can still pretty much do what it wants.

The problem is not that the laws and regulations are not enforced, although that is partly true. The problem is more that the laws and regulations are weak because of the strong influence corporations have on both Congress (this is true of Democrats as well as Republicans) and those responsible for regulating.

Keep ReadingShow less
Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

The Bring Our Families Home campaign brought together loved ones of Americans wrongly detained overseas to display portraits in the Senate Russell Rotunda on Wednesday, May 6.

(Jacques Abou-Rizk, MNS)

Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

WASHINGTON – American journalist Reza Valizadeh visited his elderly Iranian parents in March 2024 for the first time in 15 years. Valizadeh’s stories for Voice of America and other U.S. government-funded outlets often criticized the Iranian regime. So before traveling, he sought and received confirmation that he would be safe from a high-ranking commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a branch of Iran’s armed forces. However, in September that same year, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps arrested Valizadeh, and Tehran’s Revolutionary Court sentenced him to ten years in prison for “collaboration with a hostile government.”

In the Rotunda of the Senate Russell Building last week, the Bring Our Families Home campaign set up portraits of Valizadeh and 12 other Americans currently wrongfully detained overseas. The group, family members of illegitimately detained Americans, appealed to Congress to push for their safe return. Each foam poster board included the name, home state, and country of detainment. The display also included portraits of the 33 people released after advocacy by the James W. Foley Foundation.

Keep ReadingShow less
DHS Funding During the Shutdown
Getty Images, Charles-McClintock Wilson

DHS Funding During the Shutdown

When Congress failed to approve funding for the Department of Homeland Security for the remainder of this fiscal year in February, almost all of its employees began to work without pay. That situation changed, however, on April 3, when President Donald Trump issued a memorandum ordering the DHS secretary and director of the Office of Management and Budget to “use funds that have a reasonable and logical nexus to the functions of DHS” to pay its employees and issue back pay.

Trump shifted money to avoid the political embarrassment that would be caused by the collapse of airport security screening through the actions of disgruntled agents and the disruption to air travel that would ensue. But it’s legally dubious.

Keep ReadingShow less