What is Jasmine Crockett's voting record on key bipartisan bills?
Executive summary
Jasmine Crockett’s roll‑call history in the House shows a conventional Democratic pattern—frequent party-line votes but selective support for bipartisan national security and domestic measures—while legislative scorecards and tracking sites highlight both active bill sponsorship and a low conservative score (Heritage) reflecting limited crossover with GOP priorities [1] [2] [3]. Public and campaign materials emphasize her bill‑sponsorship activity and past bipartisan work at the state level, but contemporary federal roll calls and scorecards suggest Crockett mostly votes with House Democrats on marquee items [4] [1] [2].
1. Voting behavior: generally Democratic unity, with notable bipartisan national‑security votes
Crockett’s congressional voting record aligns largely with Democratic caucus positions, yet she has cast high‑profile votes that crossed partisan rhetoric lines—most prominently backing measures to aid allies after October 2023, including support for Israel and for Ukraine funding, which Britannica cites as part of her congressional record [5]. Aggregate trackers confirm she missed a modest share of roll calls but otherwise participates in party coalition votes; GovTrack documents her participation across many house roll calls and notes her rate of missed votes [1]. These data indicate that while Crockett is not a frequent breaker of party unity, she has sided with bipartisan majorities on some national security and foreign‑assistance measures [5] [1].
2. Bipartisan credentials versus scorecards: active sponsorship but low conservative ratings
Crockett has been an active sponsor and cosponsor—GovTrack and BillTrack50 show substantial legislative activity and a relatively high cosponsorship ranking within the Texas delegation—yet conservative scorecards rate her poorly, reflecting ideological divergence rather than procedural inactivity [3] [6] [2]. Her campaign and Texas legislative history stress that she helped pass bipartisan criminal‑justice reforms at the state level and filed many bills as a freshman, positioning her as a dealmaker in earlier service [4]. Voters should note the distinction between bill sponsorship (an indicator of activity and priorities) and the directional content of votes: Crockett’s legislative entrepreneurship does not translate into alignment with conservative policy agendas, as Heritage Action’s 17% score for the 118th Congress illustrates [2] [3].
3. Issue patterns: defense/foreign aid, labor and pro‑choice alignment, and procedural votes
On issue clusters, available summaries show Crockett supported funding and security measures abroad, was scored by labor groups (AFL‑CIO maintains a scorecard for her), and consistently supports reproductive and labor positions aligned with Democrats; Britannica explicitly notes votes supporting Israel and Ukraine and lists her positions on reproductive and labor issues [5] [7]. VoteSmart collects “key votes” to illustrate alignment of votes with stated positions, which suggests Crockett’s selected roll calls reinforce her stated priorities, though VoteSmart’s role is descriptive rather than evaluative [8]. Congress.gov provides granular roll‑call entries she participated in, including suspension‑rule passages and other recorded votes, but readers should consult those roll calls for item‑by‑item confirmation [9].
4. Interpretation, caveats and the terrain ahead
Interpretation of Crockett’s “bipartisan” bona fides depends on metrics: sponsorship and state‑level deals show cross‑aisle work, but roll‑call behavior and partisan scorecards indicate she largely votes with Democrats on major contested bills [4] [2] [1]. Sources here do not provide a complete, bill‑by‑bill list of every “key bipartisan” vote; researchers seeking definitive answers should consult roll‑call transcripts on Congress.gov and VoteSmart’s key‑vote pages for specific bills [9] [8]. Observers and opponents frame these facts through political lenses—her campaign emphasizes effectiveness and bipartisanship in the Texas legislature, while conservative outlets and scorecards highlight low alignment with GOP priorities—so readers must weigh institutional role, issue area, and source agendas when judging whether her record counts as “bipartisan” [4] [2] [10].