Mike Bishop

Mike Bishop

  • R-MI, 8th District2015 – present
Mike Bishop's photo

Lifetime Score 65%

67%
‘15
2015: 67%
75%
2016: 75%
68%
2017: 68%
53%
‘18
2018: 53%

Key Voting Record

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

Key Vote Description

Legislator Score / Vote

2018: 115th Congress 53%

  • 1: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Amash Amendment (USA RIGHTS Act) to S. 139Nay

    Key Vote 1: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Amash Amendment (USA RIGHTS Act) to S. 139

    The USA RIGHTS Act would prohibit the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from querying information gathered through Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) without obtaining a warrant. It would also provide narrow exceptions, such as the case of life-threatening emergencies or if the target has consented to a query followed by a warrant. The amendment codifies the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s (FISC) ban on “abouts” collection. The National Security Agency (NSA) was forced to end “abouts” collection after the FISC determined that it was inconsistent with the Fourth Amendment. Additionally, the USA RIGHTS Act, sponsored as an amendment to S. 139 as an amendment by Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), would prohibit reverse targeting, the collection of domestic communications, and the use of information obtained through Section 702 in criminal and civil court cases. It also brings a number of other important reforms to strengthen the oversight of the FISC and promote transparency.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 2: On Passage: FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act, S. 139Yea

    Key Vote 2: On Passage: FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act, S. 139

    Despite some tweaks to the original text produced by the House Select Committee on Intelligence, the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act continues to represent an assault on the Fourth Amendment. The Bill of Rights is a cornerstone of our constitutional republic, and crucial to defending the civil liberties of all American citizens. FISA has caused damage to the Fourth Amendment for years, and now is a critical time to support genuine reform, such as the USA RIGHTS Act. The revised version of the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act remains the exact opposite of reform, and it is worse than current law. The bill would continue the backdoor search, with an utterly meaningless “warrant requirement.” The caveats proposed to this purported “warrant requirement” are an end-run around the Fourth Amendment. The bill provides 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 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.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 3: DeSantis-Budd Letter Urging a Public Vote to Reinstate EarmarksNay

    Key Vote 3: DeSantis-Budd Letter Urging a Public Vote to Reinstate Earmarks

    Reps. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) and Ted Budd (R-N.C.) have spearheaded a letter that urges House Republican leaders to hold a public vote to reinstate earmarks, should the House Republican Conference move forward on the tone-deaf notion of reinstating earmarks. Put simply, there must be a public and transparent process, including a recorded vote. The American public has a right to know which members are voting to reopen the favor factory by bringing back this currency of corruption. (Signers updated as of February 14, 2018.)

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 4: On Motion to Concur: Bipartisan Budget Act, H.R. 1892Yea

    Key Vote 4: On Motion to Concur: Bipartisan Budget Act, H.R. 1892

    The Schumer-McConnell spending deal, the Bipartisan Budget Act, is the worst-case scenario for fiscal conservatives under a Democratic president and Democrat-controlled Congress, but it is happening under a Republican president and Republican Congress. This is reckless spending, and a massive tax hike on future generations, made under the guise of “bipartisan negotiations.” This is deceitful, aggressive overspending by those elected to protect taxpayers. Leaving Americans with higher budget deficits likely over $1 trillion, and a national debt that will balloon to over $21 trillion, is no way to govern, and its weight falls squarely on the shoulders of taxpayers. This deal makes clear that Republicans only care about deficits and out-of-control federal spending under a Democratic president. With a Republican president and Republican control of the House and Senate, there is no other conclusion that one can possibly draw.

    "Nay" votes scored. Triple Score
  • 5: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Walters Amendment to H.R. 1865Yea

    Key Vote 5: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Walters Amendment to H.R. 1865

    The Walters amendment would establish that Section 230 of the CDA does not impair or limit actions taken against internet service providers for sex trafficking cases in which an internet service provider “knowingly assist[s], support[s], or facilitat[es]” a violation of sex trafficking laws. For something that sounds reasonable, it is quite the opposite. The inclusion of an overbroad “knowledge” standard has been abused again and again in other areas, such as copyright law, and will undoubtedly be abused in this case. Even if passed, there is strong reason to believe that the law would be ineffective, and even counterproductive. The abusable “knowledge” standard actually will actually have the opposite of its intended effect -- disincentivizing those already working proactively to monitor content online to stop sex trafficking, by opening up their practices to legal liabilities.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 6: On Agreeing to the Resolution: Rule Providing for Consideration of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, H.R. 1625Yea

    Key Vote 6: On Agreeing to the Resolution: Rule Providing for Consideration of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, H.R. 1625

    H.Res. 796 is the rule governing the Consolidated Appropriations Act. The underlying bill is a consolidated appropriations bill packed with unrelated legislative items that Congress has not been able to pass. We oppose the rule governing the underlying bill because of the process by which leadership wrote the bill. The process by which this omnibus has been written was awful. After taking the gavel on October 29, 2015, Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said, “When we rush to pass a bill that a lot of us don't understand, we are not doing our job.” In a separate speech a week later, on November 5, Speaker Ryan said, “[T]the way I am trying to do this job is the way that I always thought it should have been done, and that is to make this a more open process so that every citizen in this country, through their elected representatives, has an opportunity to make a difference.” This omnibus was written behind closed doors, with few privy to what exactly was going in it. The bill is also more than a week behind schedule. Originally, it was supposed to be released the week of March 12, with a vote by the end of the week. That didn’t happen. Leadership hoped to vote on the bill Wednesday of this week, but last second negotiations have continued to delay the release of the bill. Now, because of the delays to pack this bill with items unrelated to appropriations, leadership plans to waive the “three-day” rule – Rule XXI, Clause II of the Rules of the House of Representatives – which requires that bills and resolutions be available for parts of three calendar days. Members and their staff will have less than 24 hours to review the 2,232-page omnibus before they are expected to vote on the bill. What’s more, the rule governing the omnibus prevents amendments from being offered from the floor. This has been an all too common theme for legislation brought to the floor. Because this bill spends nearly $1.3 trillion, a more open, deliberative process is needed. Leadership may argue that there isn’t enough time to vote on amendments, but they have only themselves to blame for the time constraints. This is legislative malpractice, and it simply can’t continue.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 7: On Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendment with an Amendment: Consolidated Appropriations Act, H.R. 1625Yea

    Key Vote 7: On Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendment with an Amendment: Consolidated Appropriations Act, H.R. 1625

    Process aside, the spending levels appropriated in the bill are nothing short of fiscally disastrous. In February, Congress passed the Bipartisan Budget Act, H.R. 1892. This two-year budget agreement blew through the spending caps by nearly four times more than the 2013 two-year budget deal and nearly five times more than the 2015 two-year budget deal. This omnibus is an extension of the Bipartisan Budget Act. It appropriates discretionary spending at $1.291 trillion – $700 billion for defense and $591 billion for nondefense – which is $143 billion above the spending levels, or caps, established by the Budget Control Act for discretionary spending levels.

    "Nay" votes scored. Triple Score
  • 8: On Agreeing to the Amendment: McClintock Amendment to H.R. 4Yea

    Key Vote 8: On Agreeing to the Amendment: McClintock Amendment to H.R. 4

    The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), would strike section 451 of the bill, which authorizes the Essential Air Service (EAS). The original purpose of EAS was to be a small program dedicated to ensuring rural communities had access to some form of air service after the airline deregulation of the 1970s. However, it has since ballooned into a wasteful program that costs taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars every year. Most of the money EAS spends subsidizes rural airports that service fewer than 30 passengers per day. This despite the fact that, according to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), 99.95 percent of people live within 120 miles of an airport. The EAS is no longer serving its purpose and is wasting taxpayer money to fund an initiative for which there is no longer any legitimate demand. Repealing section 451 would save the taxpayers $1 billion over the next five years.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 9: On Passage: Indirect Auto Lending CRA Resolution of Disapproval, S.J.Res. 57Yea

    Key Vote 9: On Passage: Indirect Auto Lending CRA Resolution of Disapproval, S.J.Res. 57

    The passage of this CRA would do nothing to change the prohibition against discrimination in the Equal Credit Opportunity Act that the guidance cites. It would simply roll back the gross regulatory overreach of the CFPB in claiming for itself -- behind closed doors and a screen of smoke -- a power that Congress, in the law that created the CFPB, explicitly banned the CFPB from having. As Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) said prior to the Senate vote, the CFPB “had to work its magic to find a way to regulate auto dealers.” Good governing is done through accountable and transparent processes, not magic.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 10: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Foxx Sugar Modernization to the Farm Bill, H.R. 2 Nay

    Key Vote 10: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Foxx Sugar Modernization to the Farm Bill, H.R. 2

    Sponsored by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) and a group of nine other bipartisan legislators, this amendment reforms U.S. sugar policy. Raw sugar in the U.S. currently costs 84 percent more than it does on the world market. This is because of almost Soviet levels of government controls placed on the domestic sugar market that limits imports and production. This increases prices on consumers and makes it difficult for candy companies to maintain operations in America. The sugar modernization amendment is a long overdue reversal of this disturbing, protectionist trend.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 11: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Massie Raw Milk Freedom to the Farm Bill, H.R. 2Nay

    Key Vote 11: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Massie Raw Milk Freedom to the Farm Bill, H.R. 2

    Sponsored by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), and Jared Polis (D-Colo.), this amendment prevents federal officials from interfering with the sales and transportation of unpasteurized milk across state lines. This ensures that nothing will get in the way of people who want fresh, unpasteurized milk, and those farmers who want to sell it to them.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 12: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks WOTUS Repeal to the Farm Bill, H.R. 2Yea

    Key Vote 12: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks WOTUS Repeal to the Farm Bill, H.R. 2

    Sponsored by Reps. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), and a coalition of over a dozen other lawmakers, this amendment repeals the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Water Rule, which loosely defines “waters of the United States.” This rule violated private citizens’ property rights by giving the EPA authority to regulate waterways as small as a ditch in someone’s backyard. Repeal of this rule would be a victory for individual liberty.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 13: On Passage: Trickett Wendler Right to Try Act, S. 204Yea

    Key Vote 13: On Passage: Trickett Wendler Right to Try Act, S. 204

    This bill would allow terminally ill patients to have access to potentially life-saving drugs when no other alternatives exist. It would ensure Americans, currently hampered by the bureaucracy of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), have the most fundamental right of all: to fight to save their own lives.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 14: On Passage: Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, S. 2155Yea

    Key Vote 14: On Passage: Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, S. 2155

    The bill would provide targeted relief in the banking industry from onerous regulatory overreach into the financial sector created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, commonly known as “Dodd-Frank.” Having passed the Senate already, passage in the House would send the bill directly to President Trump’s desk to provide regulatory relief from this onerous law, affecting millions of Americans.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 15: On Passage: Spending Cuts to Expired and Unnecessary Programs Act, H.R. 3Yea

    Key Vote 15: On Passage: Spending Cuts to Expired and Unnecessary Programs Act, H.R. 3

    Approving this initial $15 billion rescissions request in full -- pulling back funds sitting in useless accounts that can only otherwise be used to spend more in the future -- is a task that conservatives in Congress should wholeheartedly endorse. It is one of few opportunities to exercise any semblance of fiscal discipline. It is only one small step towards actually tackling Washington’s out-of-control spending addiction, but it represents a chance to begin this fight.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 16: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Gohmert Amendment to H.R. 5895Yea

    Key Vote 16: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Gohmert Amendment to H.R. 5895

    This amendment, sponsored by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), would eliminate funding for the Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E), as requested in President Trump’s budget proposal both this year and last year. As the administration has explained, ARPA-E overlaps with research and development being carried out that should be done by the private sector and is therefore not only unnecessary, but wasteful.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 17: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Blackburn Amendment to H.R. 5895Yea

    Key Vote 17: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Blackburn Amendment to H.R. 5895

    This amendment, sponsored by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), would provide for a 1 percent cut across the board to the bill’s spending levels, exempting certain accounts, like the Capitol Police.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 18: On Agreeing to the Norman Amendment to H.R. 5895Yea

    Key Vote 18: On Agreeing to the Norman Amendment to H.R. 5895

    Sponsored by Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), this amendment would reduce the total amount of appropriations made available by $1.5 billion to match the fiscal year 2018 enacted level. Increasingly high spending levels appropriated by Congress year after year have buried our country in unsustainable debt. This amendment would realize the fact that our country needs to spend less and certainly cannot afford to spend any more than it did in fiscal year 2018.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 19: On Agreeing to the Mullin-Perry Amendment to H.R. 6147Yea

    Key Vote 19: On Agreeing to the Mullin-Perry Amendment to H.R. 6147

    Sponsored by Reps. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) and Scott Perry (R-Pa.), this amendment would prohibit the use of funding for the enforcement of the EPA’s Methane Rule. The EPA estimates the annual cost of the Methane Rule at $520 million.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 20: On Agreeing to the Hice Amendment to H.R. 6147Yea

    Key Vote 20: On Agreeing to the Hice Amendment to H.R. 6147

    Sponsored by Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.), this amendment would ensure that no funds would be available to the Environmental Justice Small Grants made by the Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ). These funds have been misused to fund projects that should be left to state and local leadership, and that are unrelated to the organization’s mission. If enacted, the Hice amendment will save taxpayers $70 million over the next ten years.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 21: On Agreeing to the Palmer-Walker-Meadows Amendment to H.R. 6147Yea

    Key Vote 21: On Agreeing to the Palmer-Walker-Meadows Amendment to H.R. 6147

    Sponsored by Reps. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.), Mark Walker (R-N.C.), and Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), this amendment would prohibit the use of funds from being used to implement the District of Columbia's recently passed Health Insurance Requirement Amendment Act.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 22: On Agreeing to the Meadows Amendment to H.R. 6147Yea

    Key Vote 22: On Agreeing to the Meadows Amendment to H.R. 6147

    Sponsored by Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), this amendment would prohibit the use of funds to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from being used to administer ObamaCare’s Multi-State Plan (MSP) Program. Section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires that OPM contract at least two national health insurance plans, one of which is statutorily required to be contracted with a nonprofit entity. The MSP Program was included in ObamaCare when the so-called “public option” proved politically untenable. The MSP Program could be used as a vehicle for a public option.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 23: On Agreeing to the Anti-Carbon Tax ResolutionYea

    Key Vote 23: On Agreeing to the Anti-Carbon Tax Resolution

    Carbon taxes, like all government interventions in the economy, reward certain individuals and industries at the expense of everyone else. Independent studies into the potential impact of such a tax reveal that American families would have to pay higher electricity and fuel costs, and could lead to higher prices in other areas of the economy. This burden would be borne disproportionately by lower and middle income families, those who can least afford to do so.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 24: On Agreeing to the Conference Report to H.R. 6157Yea

    Key Vote 24: On Agreeing to the Conference Report to H.R. 6157

    The Defense, Labor, and Health and Human Services (HHS) minibus, H.R. 6157 spends profligately on programs included in the minibus and includes a short-term continuing resolution (CR) for remaining appropriations bills into fiscal year 2019. This CR is an extension of the excessive spending agreed to under the Bipartisan Budget Act, which was passed by Congress in February and spent nearly $300 billion more than the previously established spending caps meant to control the rate of spending growth. H.R. 6157 is more of the same profligate spending resulting from a broken budget process and members unwilling to stand up for their campaign promises of shrinking government and reducing spending.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 25: On Passage: Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act, H.R. 6760Yea

    Key Vote 25: On Passage: Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act, H.R. 6760

    The Protecting Family and Small Business Tax Cuts Act makes permanent the individual and pass-through business tax reforms under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which was signed into law in December 2017.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 26: On Agreeing to the Conference Report for the Farm Bill, H.R. 2Yea

    Key Vote 26: On Agreeing to the Conference Report for the Farm Bill, H.R. 2

    Given our current out-of-control government spending, American taxpayers cannot afford to continue to use billions of dollars to prop up failing agri-businesses. The subsidies programs, as bloated and wasteful as they are now, will increase in cost by over one billion over the next ten years. This is inexcusable given our crushing national debt.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 27: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass: First Step Act, S. 756Did Not Vote

    Key Vote 27: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass: First Step Act, S. 756

    The First Step Act would reform the federal criminal justice system to make our communities safer by reducing crime and focusing limited resources on the most dangerous offenders. By increasing access to and instituting incentives for inmate participation in recidivism reduction programming and by modestly modifying some sentencing laws, the First Step Act would provide much-needed changes to the federal criminal justice system. The bill would reform four areas of sentencing law by reforming 18 U.S.C. 924(c) stacking to clarify that enhancements for second and subsequent offenses are used only on those who are true recidivists, by tailoring 21 U.S.C. 841 to modify mandatory minimum sentence enhancements and those who they may apply to, by applying the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 retroactively, and by expanding the existing federal safety valve for judges sentencing individuals with little to no criminal history.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 28: Signers to the Discharge Petition for H.Res. 873Nay

    Key Vote 28: Signers to the Discharge Petition for H.Res. 873

    If passed, this petition would pave the way for the return of the Obama administration’s heavy-handed Internet regulations, which were overturned by the Restoring Internet Freedom Order. FreedomWorks will key vote the signers of this petition, treating signatures as an anti-freedom position for the purposes of our 2018 Congressional Scorecard.

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