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

For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

Praying outdoors

ImagineGolf/Getty Images

For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

The American experiment has been sustained not by flawless execution of its founding ideals but by the moral imagination of people who refused to surrender hope. From abolitionists to suffragists to the foot soldiers of the civil-rights movement, generations have insisted that the Republic live up to its creed. Yet today that hope feels imperiled. Coarsened public discourse, the normalization of cruelty in policy, and the corrosion of democratic trust signal more than political dysfunction—they expose a crisis of meaning.

Naming that crisis is not enough. What we need, I argue, is a recovered ethic of humaneness—a civic imagination rooted in empathy, dignity, and shared responsibility. Eric Liu, through Citizens University and his "Civic Saturday" fellows and gatherings, proposes that democracy requires a "civic religion," a shared set of stories and rituals that remind us who we are and what we owe one another. I find deep resonance between that vision and what I call humane theology. That is, a belief and moral framework that insists public life cannot flourish when empathy is starved.

Keep ReadingShow less
For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

Praying outdoors

ImagineGolf/Getty Images

For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

The American experiment has been sustained not by flawless execution of its founding ideals but by the moral imagination of people who refused to surrender hope. From abolitionists to suffragists to the foot soldiers of the civil-rights movement, generations have insisted that the Republic live up to its creed. Yet today that hope feels imperiled. Coarsened public discourse, the normalization of cruelty in policy, and the corrosion of democratic trust signal more than political dysfunction—they expose a crisis of meaning.

Naming that crisis is not enough. What we need, I argue, is a recovered ethic of humaneness—a civic imagination rooted in empathy, dignity, and shared responsibility. Eric Liu, through Citizens University and his "Civic Saturday" fellows and gatherings, proposes that democracy requires a "civic religion," a shared set of stories and rituals that remind us who we are and what we owe one another. I find deep resonance between that vision and what I call humane theology. That is, a belief and moral framework that insists public life cannot flourish when empathy is starved.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Myth of Colorblind Fairness

U.S. Supreme Court

Photo by mana5280 on Unsplash

The Myth of Colorblind Fairness

Two years after the Supreme Court banned race-conscious college admissions in Students for Fair Admissions, universities are scrambling to maintain diversity through “race-neutral” alternatives they believe will be inherently fair. New economic research reveals that colorblind policies may systematically create inequality in ways more pervasive than even the notorious “old boy” network.

The “old boy” network, as its name suggests, is nothing new—evoking smoky cigar lounges or golf courses where business ties are formed, careers are launched, and those not invited are left behind. Opportunity reproduces itself, passed down like an inheritance if you belong to the “right” group. The old boy network is not the only example of how a social network can discriminate. In fact, my research shows it may not even be the best one. And how social networks discriminate completely changes the debate about diversity.

Keep ReadingShow less
Rethinking Drug Policy: From Punishment to Empowerment
holding hands
Photo by Priscilla Du Preez 🇨🇦 on Unsplash

Rethinking Drug Policy: From Punishment to Empowerment

America’s drug policy is broken. For decades, we’ve focused primarily on the supply side—interdicting smugglers, prosecuting dealers, and escalating penalties while neglecting the demand side. Individuals who use drugs, more often than not, do so out of desperation, trauma, or addiction. This imbalance has cost lives, strained law enforcement, and failed to stem the tide of overdose deaths.

Fentanyl now kills an estimated 80,000 Americans annually. In response, some leaders have proposed extreme measures, including capital punishment for traffickers. But if we apply that logic consistently, what do we say about tobacco? Cigarette smoking and secondhand smoke kill nearly 480,000 Americans

Keep ReadingShow less