Pete Ricketts

Became law (7)

• 

  Pete Ricketts (R-NE)· May 9

  Their bill

  A joint resolution disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications".

  S.J.Res. 28 Finance and Financial Sector

  A Republican resolution with 5 Republican cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Became law

  The House voted 219–211 on Apr 9.

  This is a joint resolution from the 119th Congress. It expresses disapproval of a specific final rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

  The opposite· 2 of 3

  • Scored -5

    Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?

    The resolution nullifies a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection rule intended to define larger participants in digital payment markets, which could reduce oversight and consumer protections.

  • Scored -3

    Does this give the federal government more power?

    The resolution limits the regulatory authority of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection by nullifying its recently submitted rule.

  No question was scored yes.

• 

  Katie Britt (R-AL)· Jun 26

  Cosponsored

  Lulu’s Law

  S. 1003 Science, Technology, Communications

  A Republican bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Became law

  The House voted 401–6 on May 20.

  This Act directs the Federal Communications Commission to take specific action regarding emergency notifications.

  Yes

  • Scored +5

    Does this improve help for people hit by a disaster?

    The expansion of wireless emergency alerts for shark attacks enhances public safety during natural or environmental emergencies.

  • Scored +2

    Does this give the federal government more power?

    The bill directs the FCC, a federal agency, to mandate new wireless emergency alert criteria.

  No question was scored the opposite.

• 

  Dan Sullivan (R-AK)· Aug 14

  Cosponsored

  PRO Veterans Act of 2025

  S. 423 Armed Forces and National Security

  A Republican bill with 13 Republican cosponsors.

  Became law

  This bill aims to protect regular order for budgeting within the Department of Veterans Affairs.

  Yes· 2 of 5

  • Scored +5

    Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?

    The act improves veteran service through better data collection, improved website accessibility, and increased budgetary transparency.

  • Scored +5

    Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?

    The bill mandates quarterly briefings on budget shortfalls and required mitigation plans to ensure budgetary oversight.

  No question was scored the opposite.

And 4 more on their Sponsored and Cosponsored pages.

Passed one chamber, waiting on the other (8)

Halfway: the other chamber has to pass the same text before it can go to the President.

• 

  Pete Ricketts (R-NE)· Dec 11

  Their bill

  PORCUPINE Act

  S. 1744 International Affairs

  A Republican bill with 3 Democratic cosponsors.

  Passed the Senate

  With no one objecting, no names recorded

  Now: kept ready for the floor instead of being sent to a committee · Dec 15

  This bill seeks to amend the Arms Export Control Act to include Taiwan among the recipient countries that qualify for shorter certification and reporting periods.

  Yes· 2 of 3

  • Scored +5

    Does this strengthen ties with allied countries?

    The bill strengthens ties with allies by facilitating more efficient military equipment transfers to Taiwan.

  • Scored +1

    Would gun owners be better off under this?

    The bill concerns international military transfers rather than domestic firearm ownership rights.

  No question was scored the opposite.

• 

  Ted Cruz (R-TX)· Sep 28

  Cosponsored

  Protect College Sports Act of 2026

  S. 4668 Sports and Recreation

  A Republican bill with 5 Democratic cosponsors. See the voting map.

  Passed the Senate

  The Senate voted 77–22 on Sep 29.

  77–22

  This bill sets national rules for student athlete name, image, and likeness rights. It creates protections for academic progress, medical coverage, and health and safety standards.

  Yes· 2 of 22

  • Scored +9

    Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this?

    Significantly expands earning potential through NIL rights and provides medical and academic protections for college athletes.

  • Scored +8

    Does this make health care easier to get in general?

    Requires institutions to cover all out-of-pocket medical expenses for sports-related injuries and provides post-eligibility funds.

  The opposite

  • Scored -5

    Does this leave more decisions to the states?

    Prevents states from enforcing their own NIL compensation and transfer laws that conflict with the federal framework.

  • Scored -2

    Does this protect people from being watched or searched?

    Mandates disclosure of NIL agreements over $600 to institutions.

• 

  David McCormick (R-PA)· Sep 28

  Cosponsored

  Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2026

  S. 4395 Finance and Financial Sector

  A Republican bill with 20 Democratic cosponsors.

  Passed the Senate

  With no one objecting, no names recorded

  Now: kept ready for the floor instead of being sent to a committee · Oct 5

  This bill extends the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 by seven years. The new termination date for the program is changed from 2027 to 2034.

  Yes· 2 of 5

  • Scored +3

    Would business owners be better off under this?

    Business owners benefit from the extended availability and affordability of terrorism risk insurance coverage.

  • Scored +3

    Is this likely to grow the economy?

    Extending the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program provides stability and confidence for commercial real estate and business investments.

  No question was scored the opposite.

And 5 more on their Sponsored and Cosponsored pages.

Who their bills would affect

• Would business owners be better off under this? 32 no, 148 yes. 3 of these passed a chamber
• Would households on low incomes be better off under this? 47 no, 80 yes. 7 of these passed a chamber (4 yes, 3 no)
• Would people in rural areas be better off under this? 1 no, 88 yes. 2 of these passed a chamber
• Would middle-income households be better off under this? 18 no, 59 yes. 6 of these passed a chamber (5 yes, 1 no)

What else they would change

• Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? 13 no, 123 yes. 3 of these passed a chamber
• Does this give the federal government more power? 35 no, 98 yes. 5 of these passed a chamber (3 yes, 2 no)
• Does this make it easier to run a small business? 12 no, 98 yes. 1 of these passed a chamber
• Is this likely to grow the economy? 5 no, 86 yes. 3 of these passed a chamber