Tom Marino

Tom Marino

  • R-PA, 12th District2019 – present
  • R-PA, 10th District2011 – present
Tom Marino's photo

Lifetime Score 52%

66%
‘11
2011: 66%
26%
2012: 26%
55%
2013: 55%
52%
2014: 52%
59%
2015: 59%
65%
2016: 65%
39%
2017: 39%
48%
‘18
2018: 48%

Contact Information

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. Marino hasn't been scored for 2019 because he resigned on January 23.

  • 1: On Passage: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019Nay

    Key Vote 1: On Passage: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019

    The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2019 was introduced on the first day of the 116th Congress, without any markup or hearings. No amendments were allowed from the floor. The bill spends at the levels authorized by the Bipartisan Budget Act, which are higher than the previous spending caps established in 2015. No fiscal conservative should support such a poor process and higher spending levels.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 4: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Davidson Amendment (#32) to H.R. 1Nay

    Key Vote 4: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Davidson Amendment (#32) to H.R. 1

    This amendment, sponsored by Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), strikes subtitle F of H.R. 1, which would force the disclosure of contributions made by corporations. This is a clear attempt by House Democrats to pave the way for political pressure on businesses that donate to organizations that promote certain causes, including ideological organizations, with which Democrats disagree.

    "Yea" votes scored.
  • 12: Rep. Chip Roy's Letter to Speaker Pelosi Against Busting the Spending CapsIneligible

    Key Vote 12: Rep. Chip Roy's Letter to Speaker Pelosi Against Busting the Spending Caps

    Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) has circulated a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for signers. The letter expresses strong opposition to another deal to bust the discretionary spending caps. As part of our effort to defeat a discretionary spending caps deal, FreedomWorks is key voting the signatories to the letter.

    "Yea" votes scored. Triple Score
  • 13: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Concur in the Senate Amendment: Supplemental Appropriations Act - H.R. 2157Nay

    Key Vote 13: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Concur in the Senate Amendment: Supplemental Appropriations Act - H.R. 2157

    The Senate amendment to H.R. 2157 would provide for $19.1 billion in disaster relief funds for wildfires, hurricanes, and flooding, as well as for Puerto Rico. This bill, which has been heavily negotiated for months, is nothing that any Republican should support. It appropriates too much money -- more money than previously-passed versions of the legislation -- when there is already more than $29 billion of disaster relief money still unspent. Furthermore, it will be voted on with only hours’ notice without any members having truly read through the lengthy legislation to understand what is in it. This is unacceptable. Instead of continuing this abhorrent process for passing bills, Congress needs to change the way it approaches disaster relief spending. When we as a nation are $22 trillion in debt as we are now, the last thing we need to be doing is appropriating money that we don’t have, to causes that we don’t fully understand, in an unlimited manner.

    "Nay" votes scored.
  • 14: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Foster Amendment to H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 14: 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.
  • 15: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Castor Amendment to H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 15: 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.
  • 16: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division A to H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 16: 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.
  • 17: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Walker Amendment (#89) to H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 17: 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.
  • 18: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Palmer Amendment to H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 18: 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.
  • 19: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division D of H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 19: 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.
  • 20: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Amash Amendment to H.R. 2740Nay

    Key Vote 20: 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
  • 24: On Agreeing to the Amendment: Banks Amendment to Division B to H.R. 3055Nay

    Key Vote 24: 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.
  • No votes for this year match the provided filters.
  • View scorecard »