Robert Califf was presiding over the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2016 when President Barack Obama rushed through several modifications that weakened existing safety precautions for prescribing chemical abortion pills. In December 2021, the FDA weakened these protocols yet again, this time to allow chemical abortion pills to be sent through the mail. Califf’s past experience prioritizing the interests of the abortion industry over the health and safety of women makes him unsuitable for this role. This vote was on final confirmation, which required 51 votes.

(Confirmed 2/15/2022, 50 yeas to 46 nays, Roll Call No. 55)

FRC Action opposed this Confirmation.

Sponsored by Rep. Judy Chu (D-CA) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), the so-called Women’s Health Protection Act (H.R. 3755) would mandate abortion-on-demand nationwide while simultaneously striking down commonsense pro-life laws across the United States. This is the most radical abortion bill on which the U.S. Congress has ever voted. This vote was on the Motion to Proceed to the underlying bill, which required 60 votes.

(Failed 2/28/2022, 46 yeas to 48 nays, Roll Call No. 65)

FRC Action opposed this Bill.

The FY 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 2471) contained all 12 regular appropriations bills to fund the government for the remainder of the fiscal year. Although these appropriations bills maintained all existing pro-life and pro-family policy riders, the FY 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act contained the full text of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, which dilutes sex discrimination allegations by unfairly and dangerously elevating “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to protected class status, erroneously equating these subjective categories with the immutable characteristic of sex. This vote was on the Motion to Concur in a House amendment, which required 60 votes to pass.

(Passed 3/10/2022, 68 yeas to 31 nays, Roll Call No. 78)

FRC Action opposed this Bill.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s inability or unwillingness to define the word “woman” during her confirmation hearing indicates a willingness to enshrine “gender identity” ideology into law. The unwavering support she received from pro-abortion activists, her record on abortion laws, and her disingenuous hedge during her confirmation hearing regarding the true holding in Roe v. Wade indicate that she will likely be a pro-abortion justice who rules against protections for the unborn. Furthermore, she did not clearly articulate a judicial philosophy that would prevent her from being a judicial activist and hold her to the Constitution.

(Cloture invoked on 4/7/2022, 53 yeas to 47 nays, Roll Call No. 133)

FRC Action opposed this Nomination.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s inability or unwillingness to define the word “woman” during her confirmation hearing indicates a willingness to enshrine “gender identity” ideology into law. The unwavering support she received from pro-abortion activists, her record on abortion laws, and her disingenuous hedge during her confirmation hearing regarding the true holding in Roe v. Wade indicate that she will likely be a pro-abortion justice who rules against protections for the unborn. Furthermore, she did not clearly articulate a judicial philosophy that would prevent her from being a judicial activist and hold her to the Constitution. This vote was on final confirmation, which required 51 votes.

(Confirmed on 4/7/2022, 53 yeas to 47 nays, Roll Call No. 134)

FRC Action opposed this Confirmation.

Sponsored by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), the so-called Women’s Health Protection Act (S. 4132) would mandate abortion-on-demand nationwide while simultaneously striking down commonsense pro-life laws across the United States. This is the most radical abortion bill on which the U.S. Congress has ever voted. This vote was on the Motion to Proceed to the underlying bill, which required 60 votes.

(Failed 5/11/2022, 49 yeas to 51 nays, Roll Call No. 170)

FRC Action opposed this Bill.

Sponsored by Rep. Bradley Schneider (D-IL), the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act (H.R. 350) would create domestic terrorism offices across the country to “analyze and monitor domestic terrorist activity and require the federal government to take steps to prevent domestic terrorism.” While this intent appears laudable, the method is ripe for abuse, is unnecessary, and builds upon a flawed hate crimes framework. The federal government already has multiple offices and resources to target all forms of terrorism, and some of these existing offices have been recently abused. In one recent example, concerned parents who raised questions at school board meetings about what their children were being taught were investigated by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) as possible domestic terrorists. This vote was on the Motion to Proceed to the underlying bill, which required 60 votes.

(Failed 5/26/2022, 47 yeas to 47 nays, Roll Call No. 210)

FRC Action opposed this Bill.

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, putatively a response to school shootings and other violent acts, should be about protecting children’s physical safety, not injecting the federal government into their physical and mental health care. But through a secretive process, the bipartisan gun control negotiations produced a flawed bill that opens the door to federal funds being used to set up school-based health centers to become abortion providers, incentivizes public schools to insert themselves into the direct provision of health care to children (with or without their parents’ involvement), and contains vague language regarding mental health intervention and assessments that does not sufficiently guard against possible harms to children. The motion required 60 votes to pass.

(Passed 6/23/2022, 65 yeas to 33 nays, Roll Call No. 242)

FRC Action opposed this Bill.

Offered by Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA), S. Amdt. 5262 to S. Amdt. 5194 to the Inflation Reduction Act (H.R. 5376) would provide Medicaid coverage for states that opted not to expand Medicaid, without any pro-life protections. This would create a mandate to include abortion coverage as well as coverage for women to travel across state lines to obtain abortions. This amendment needed 51 votes to pass.

(Failed 8/7/2022, 5 yeas to 94 nays, Roll Call No. 310)

FRC Action opposed this Amendment.

Offered by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), this Motion to Commit would have sent the Inflation Reduction Act (H.R. 5376) back to the Judiciary Committee with instructions to consider text that would ensure the U.S. Department of Justice does not use resources to inappropriately target parents or classify them as domestic terrorists. This Motion needed 51 votes to pass. Vice President Kamala Harris broke the tie by voting against the Motion.

(Failed 8/7/2022, 50 yeas to 50 nays, Roll Call No. 316)

FRC Action supported this Motion.

Offered by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), this Motion to Commit would have sent the Inflation Reduction Act (H.R. 5376) back to the Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee with instructions to consider text that would define “pregnancy” in a way that limits maternal and infant-related programs to biological females. This Motion needed 51 votes to pass. Vice President Kamala Harris broke the tie by voting against the Motion.

(Failed 8/7/2022, 50 yeas to 50 nays, Roll Call No. 319)

FRC Action supported this Motion.

Sponsored by Rep. John Yarmuth (D-KY), the so-called Inflation Reduction Act (Schumer Amendment #5194 to H.R. 5376) is a nearly $800 billion partisan spending package that would increase taxes on middle-class Americans in order to increase taxpayer funding of healthcare plans that pay for abortion. This bill also includes $80 billion to increase IRS enforcement despite the IRS having a past record of weaponizing audits, the nonprofit review process, and other enforcement mechanisms in order to discriminate against conservative and faith-based groups. This vote was on a budget reconciliation measure, which required 51 votes to pass. Vice President Kamala Harris broke the tie in favor of the measure.

(Passed 8/7/2022, 50 yeas to 50 nays, Roll Call No. 325)

FRC Action opposed this Bill.

Sponsored by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the so-called Respect for Marriage Act (H.R. 8404) would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which was enacted in 1996 to uphold and protect natural marriage. The Respect for Marriage Act would also codify same-sex marriage into federal law, make faith-based entities (like adoption and foster care agencies) an even greater target for frivolous litigation, threaten the tax-exempt status of entities that believe in or operate on the basis of natural marriage, and legislatively cement policy harmful to children. This vote was on the Motion to Proceed to the underlying bill, which required 60 votes.

(Passed on 11/16/2022, 62 yeas to 37 nays, Roll Call No. 356)

FRC Action opposed this Cloture Vote.

Sponsored by Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Amdt. 6487 to the Respect for Marriage Act (H.R. 8404) purported to fix the dangerous flaws in the bill regarding religious liberty. Unfortunately, it does not. The substitute amendment adds an empty statement acknowledging existing religious liberty and conscience rights protected in the U.S. Constitution or federal law (little comfort to those already being attacked for their faith despite access to these rights); restates existing narrow protections for pastors, rabbis, and imams but does nothing to protect those who have been targeted with lawsuits because of their faith; and adds a poorly crafted section claimed to protect religious entities’ tax-exempt status but does not negate the legal threat created. This substitute amendment provides no meaningful, affirmative, or enforceable shield of protection to those people and entities already being attacked for their belief in natural marriage and does more harm than good. This vote was on the Motion to Proceed to the amendment, which required 60 votes.

(Passed on 11/28/2022, 61 yeas to 35 nays, Roll Call No. 358)

FRC Action opposed this Amendment.

Sponsored by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the so-called Respect for Marriage Act (H.R. 8404) would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which was enacted in 1996 to uphold and protect natural marriage. The Respect for Marriage Act would also codify same-sex marriage into federal law, make faith-based entities (like adoption and foster care agencies) an even greater target for frivolous litigation, threaten the tax-exempt status of entities that believe in or operate on the basis of natural marriage, and legislatively cement policy harmful to children. This bill required 60 votes to pass.

(Passed on 11/29/2022, 61 yeas to 36 nays, Roll Call No. 362)

FRC Action opposed this Bill.

Offered by Sen. James Lankford (R-TX), S. Amdt. 6577 to S. Amdt. 6558 to S. Amdt. 6552 to H.R. 2617, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, would clarify that religious employers will not be forced to provide abortion accommodations to their employees. While no employer should ever be forced to participate in, provide, accommodate, or sanction abortion, the Lankford amendment would clarify the religious liberty rights of religious employers. This amendment needed 51 votes to pass.

(Failed 12/22/2022, 44 yeas to 53 nays, Roll Call No. 414)

FRC Action supported this Amendment.

Sponsored by Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-VA), the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, 2023 (H.R. 2617) is rife with harmful language that could be used to undermine life and family. The bill leaves the door open for funds to be exploited by the abortion industry through the PREVENT Pandemics Act (S. 3799) and directs the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to upgrade its medical facilities to increase its capacity to provide abortions to female veterans. In addition, it would force employers to provide abortion accommodations to their employees through the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. The bill contains nearly 12 million dollars in earmarks that perpetuate radical, far-Left ideology on human sexuality at home and abroad. It would advance an unnecessary, harmful, and radical transgender agenda at the expense of biological females. This vote was on the Motion to Concur in a House amendment, which required 60 votes to pass.

(Passed on 12/22/2022, 68 yeas to 29 nays, Roll Call No. 421)

FRC Action opposed this Bill.