Fred Keller

Fred Keller

  • R-PA, 12th District2019 – present
Fred Keller's photo

Lifetime Score 76%

Key Voting Record

Ineligible / Out of OfficeDid Not Vote
Voted with FreedomWorks principlesAnti-Freedom Vote
Print Scorecard

Key Vote Description

Legislator Score / Vote

2019: 116th Congress N/A

Rep. Jones has not been scored for 2019 because he did not enter the House until June 3.

  • 16: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Foster Amendment to H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 16: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Foster Amendment to H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.), this amendment would strike Section 510 of the Labor-HHS Appropriations bill which currently prohibits HHS from spending any federal dollars to promulgate or adopt a national patient identifier.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 17: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Castor Amendment to H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 17: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Castor Amendment to H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), this amendment would prohibit the funds made available by this Act from being used to implement, administer or enforce the Trump administration's short-term, limited duration insurance rule. While short-term, limited duration health plans are no fix to Obamacare, they are a step in the right direction in expanding consumer choice and access to plans that are not governed by Obamacare’s harmful Title I regulations.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 18: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division A to H.R. 2740Yea

    Key Vote 18: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division A to H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), this amendment reduces spending for each amount in Division A by 14 percent. This reduction would be consistent with spending levels under the Budget Control Act of 2011.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 19: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Leutkemeyer Amendment (#81) to H.R. 2740Yea

    Key Vote 19: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Leutkemeyer Amendment (#81) to H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Mo.), this amendment would ensure that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available to any Federal department or agency by this Act may be used to make assessed or voluntary contributions on behalf of the United States to or for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, or the Green Climate Fund.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 20: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Gosar Amendment to H.R. 2740Yea

    Key Vote 20: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Gosar Amendment to H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), this amendment prohibits funds from being used for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 21: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Walker Amendment (#89) to H.R. 2740Yea

    Key Vote 21: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Walker Amendment (#89) to H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.), this amendment eliminates $23.9 billion in funding for the bilateral economic assistance and independent agency programs within the Department of State. This amendment would, over a ten year period, fully offset the enormous disaster relief package that was fully un-offset when it passed the House last week. It cuts enough to both pay for the cost of the bill ($19.1 billion) as well as the assumed interest on the debt ($5.87 billion) that the bill created.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 22: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Palmer Amendment to H.R. 2740Yea

    Key Vote 22: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Palmer Amendment to H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.), this amendment strikes the paragraph that prevents the U.S. from withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement and strikes the paragraph that allows for payments for the agreement. Virtually none of the signers of the Paris Agreement have met their emissions reduction targets, while in the same period the United States has led the world in greenhouse gas emissions reduction. We should continue to let the market, not intergovernmental agreements, lead the way in reducing emissions.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 23: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division D of H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 23: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division D of H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), this amendment would reduce spending for each amount in Division D, except those amounts made available to the Department of Defense, by 14 percent. We should note that while this amendment is on the right track, it would be even better if it did not exclude those amounts made available to the Department of Defense from its cuts. No department should be exempt from close scrutiny, and the Department of Defense, like most other agencies, has proven to be one rampant with waste and excessive, unnecessary spending. With the national debt looming as our greatest national security threat, it is in the best interest of the military itself to pare back on Pentagon spending.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 24: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Amash Amendment to H.R. 2740Yea

    Key Vote 24: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Amash Amendment to H.R. 2740

    "Sponsored by Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), this amendment would limit the warrantless collection of Americans’ communications under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Passed in January 2018, the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act was the exact opposite of reform. It continued the backdoor search loophole, through which the communications of Americans may be collected and unconstitutionally searched by the FBI, with an utterly meaningless “warrant requirement.” The caveats created by this purported “warrant requirement” are an end-run around the Fourth Amendment. The FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act provided a path for the National Security Agency (NSA) to restart the practice of “abouts” collection. This means if a U.S. person mentions a potential surveillance target in a communication, the NSA can collect it, regardless of whether or not the U.S. person was communicating with anyone associated with the target. When the NSA was forced to end “abouts” collection, a federal judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) wrote that the practice raised “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.” The judge also criticized the NSA for “an institutional lack of candor” for failing to disclose rule violations."

    "Yea" votes scored. Double Score
  • 25: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Mullin Amendment to H.R. 2740Yea

    Key Vote 25: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Mullin Amendment to H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), this amendment prohibits the use of funds from being used to promulgate any regulation or guidance related to the “social cost of carbon” based on analyses provided by the Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon. The social cost of carbon measures carbon emissions in dollars and may be used to determine a costly tax on carbon emissions.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 26: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division E to H.R. 2740Yea

    Key Vote 26: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division E to H.R. 2740

    Sponsored by Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), this amendment reduces spending for each amount in Division E by 14 percent. This reduction would be consistent with spending levels under the Budget Control Act of 2011. FreedomWorks will continue to review amendments to H.R. 2740 and, hopefully, send only one more key vote notice if additional amendments are made in order.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 27: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division A of H.R. 3055Yea

    Key Vote 27: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division A of H.R. 3055

    Sponsored by Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), this amendment reduces spending for each amount in Division A by 14 percent. This reduction would be consistent with spending levels under the Budget Control Act of 2011.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 28: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Underwood Amendment to H.R. 3055Nay

    Key Vote 28: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Underwood Amendment to H.R. 3055

    Sponsored by Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.), this amendment would prevent the Department of Justice from using funds to litigate any case in which the constitutionality or enforceability of any provision of Obamacare is in question. Obviously, this amendment is aimed at the Department of Justice’s participation in Texas v. United States. This case is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Oral arguments will be heard in July.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 29: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division B to H.R. 3055Nay

    Key Vote 29: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division B to H.R. 3055

    Sponsored by Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), this amendment reduces spending for each amount in Division B by 14 percent. This reduction would be consistent with spending levels under the Budget Control Act of 2011.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 30: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Duncan Amendment to H.R. 3055Yea

    Key Vote 30: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Duncan Amendment to H.R. 3055

    Sponsored by Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.), this amendment would prohibit the use of funds for the Obama-era EPA’s Clean Power Plan. According to the Heritage Foundation, the Clean Power Plan would have created an annual shortfall of 300,000 jobs, a loss of $2.5 trillion in GDP, and $7,000 in lost income per person.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 31: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Hice Amendment to H.R. 3055Yea

    Key Vote 31: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Hice Amendment to H.R. 3055

    Sponsored by Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.), this amendment would reduce the amounts appropriated in Division C by 23.6 percent, unless a specific amount is required by law. This reduction would match the President’s budget request for FY 2020.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 32: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Bost Amendment to H.R. 3055Yea

    Key Vote 32: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Bost Amendment to H.R. 3055

    Sponsored by Rep. Mike Bost (R-Ill.), this amendment would prohibit the use of funds from contravening an executive order to “buy American.” This amendment comes at a time when protectionism has at least somewhat diminished the benefits of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Indeed, a recent study by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation found that the tariffs imposed since 2017 represent the third largest tax hike since World War II. The study also found that if all threatened tariffs are imposed “the combined result will be far and away the largest tax increase in the post-war era in real dollar terms.” This amendment may not be about tariffs, but it’s the same protectionist sentiment.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 33: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division C of H.R. 3055Nay

    Key Vote 33: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division C of H.R. 3055

    Sponsored by Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), this amendment reduces spending for each amount in Division C by 14 percent. This reduction would be consistent with spending levels under the Budget Control Act of 2011.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 34: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Brindisi Amendment (#13) to H.R. 2500Nay

    Key Vote 34: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Brindisi Amendment (#13) to H.R. 2500

    Sponsored by Reps. Anthony Brindisi (D-N.Y.) and David McKinley (R-W.Va.), this amendment would reinstate the protectionist Berry Amendment, which requires the Department of Defense to domestically source stainless steel flatware, and would also add a “dinner ware” domestic sourcing requirement.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 35: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Lieu Amendment (#419) to H.R. 2500Nay

    Key Vote 35: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Lieu Amendment (#419) to H.R. 2500

    Sponsored by Reps. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and Justin Amash (I-Mich.), this amendment would prohibit funds from being used to transfer any defense articles or services to Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates under the emergency authority of the Arms Export Control Act that circumvents congressional review.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 36: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Khanna Amendment (#35) to H.R. 2500Nay

    Key Vote 36: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Khanna Amendment (#35) to H.R. 2500

    Sponsored by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), this amendment would prohibit unauthorized military force in or against Iran.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 37: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Lee Amendment (#35) to H.R. 2500Nay

    Key Vote 37: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Lee Amendment (#35) to H.R. 2500

    Sponsored by Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Justin Amash (I-Mich.), this amendment would repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 38: On Passage: Raise the Wage Act, H.R. 582Nay

    Key Vote 38: On Passage: Raise the Wage Act, H.R. 582

    The Raise the Wage Act would increase the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour over five years. A more appropriate short title for H.R. 582 would be the “Guaranteed Unemployment for Low-Skill and Entry-Level Workers Act.”

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 39: On Passage: Generational Theft Act - H.R. 3877Nay

    Key Vote 39: On Passage: Generational Theft Act - H.R. 3877

    The so-called "Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019," which would be more appropriately named the "Generational Theft Act," will increase the discretionary spending caps by more $320 billion over two fiscal years and suspend the debt limit through July 31, 2021. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), discretionary spending would be $1.119 trillion in FY 2020 and $1.145 trillion in FY 2021. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 would increase discretionary spending to $1.290 trillion in FY 2020 and $1.298 trillion in FY 2021. In total, this is a more than $320 billion spending increase over two fiscal years. Additionally, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 also includes $156.5 billion over two fiscal years for overseas contingency operations (OCO), which is used by Congress to bypass the discretionary spending caps. Prior to this budget deal, the CBO projected that the budget deficit would be $892 billion for FY 2020 and $962 billion in FY 2021. The discretionary spending levels in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 guarantee a return to $1 trillion budget deficits. Making matters worse, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 suspends the debt limit through July 31, 2021, providing the Department of the Treasury with a virtual blank check to borrow, accumulating more debt that future generations will have to shoulder. This deal on the discretionary spending caps is nothing short of a surrender by Republican “leadership” in the House and Senate and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. Of course, we’ll be told that spending cuts will be on the agenda when Republicans get control of Congress again. Sadly, those promises never seem to come to pass. After all, Republican “leadership” and rank-and-file members don’t have any intention of governing by the limited government rhetoric on which they campaign. Instead, these Republicans vote with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) for higher spending and more debt.

    "Nay" votes scored. Triple Score
  • No votes for this year match the provided filters.
  • View scorecard »