Here’s how U.S. House members voted on major issues during the legislative week of Jan. 30-Feb. 3.

The floor of the U.S. House of Representatives



Voting 227 for and 203 against, the House on Jan. 31 passed a bill (HR 497) that would immediately terminate a federal mandate that healthcare workers at Medicare- and Medicaid-funded hospitals, nursing homes, clinics, surgery centers and other treatment facilities be vaccinated against COVID -19. The directive by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid was put into effect in September 2021 and upheld by the Supreme Court in January 2022.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con:

Kat Cammack, R-Fla., said: “The Biden administration’s authoritarian COVID-19 vaccine mandate on our dedicated medical professionals is an absolute abuse of power. It is an attack on the personal freedoms of our frontline workers and it has certainly unnecessarily exacerbated the healthcare workforce shortage. This bears repeating: We are not anti-vaccine. We are anti-mandate.”

Opponent Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said: “COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, and they have been essential to saving lives, rebuilding our economy, and protecting the health of our communities. More than 668 million COVID-19 vaccine doses have been administered here in the United States, which has resulted in 120 million fewer COVID–19 infections, 18.5 million fewer hospitalizations, and 3.2 million lives saved.”

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Democratic-led Senate, where it was likely to fail.


Voting 210 for and 219 against, the House on Jan. 31 defeated a motion by Democrats that sought to replace HR 497 (above) with the Women’s Health Protection Act, a bill passed by the House but not the Senate in the previous Congress. The bill would establish a right in federal law for women to receive abortions and for healthcare providers to administer them notwithstanding restrictions imposed by states under the Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling in June 2022, which overturned Roe v. Wade and returned control of abortions to the states.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con:

Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., said the GOP bill “is nonsense and would expose patients to unnecessary risk, all because Republicans are trying to score political points. That is why my motion to recommit would strike this bill and insert the Women’s Health Protection Act, legislation that would actually keep the American people safe and healthy.”

No member spoke against the motion.

A yes vote was to adopt the Democratic motion.


Voting 220 for and 210 against, the House on Jan. 31 passed a bill (HR 382) that would immediately revoke two COVID-19 emergency declarations that were put into effect by the Trump administration in 2020 and renewed 12 times by the Biden administration. The day before this vote, President Biden announced he would revoke the declarations on May 11, 2023. They have expanded social programs including food stamps; required Medicare Advantage to reimburse COVID patients for out-of-network treatments; raised Medicare reimbursements to hospitals; expanded telemedicine; and required Medicare, Medicaid and most private plans to provide free or low-cost COVID vaccinations, testing and therapeutic care to millions of Americans. In addition, ending the emergencies would remove up to 15 million individuals from Medicaid in certain states that have agreed to boost Medicaid enrollment in exchange for increased federal matching funds.

Floor Debate, Pro & Con:

Sponsor Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., said his bill “sends a loud and clear message to President Biden: The American people are tired of living in a perpetual state of emergency, and it is long overdue for Congress to take back the authorities granted under Article I of the Constitution.”

Opponent Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., asked: “Why are we spending time abruptly ending this declaration, which is going to end in three months anyway, when we could have instead had a serious conversation about making this as smooth a transition as possible?”

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Democratic-led Senate, where it was likely to fail.


Voting 210 for and 220 against, the House on Jan. 31 defeated a Democratic motion that sought to ensure there would be no immediate cuts in Medicare payments to hospitals or reductions in Medicare coverage for seniors if HR 382 (above) became law.

Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., asked: “What would an instant cut to the social safety-net mean for Medicare beneficiaries and their families? The American family could face an abrupt increase in costs and decrease in care. What would this mean for your local hospital back home? Hospitals could see a cut of 20 percent for care of COVID patients.”

No member spoke against the motion.

A yes vote was to adopt the Democratic motion.


Voting 221 for and 206 against, the House on Feb. 1 passed a bill (HR 139) that would roll back policies that have allowed as many as 75 percent of civil servants in most agencies and departments to telework from home as a protection against COVID-19. The bill requires federal workplaces to return to 2019 telework levels within 30 days. If an agency or department wishes to continue pandemic-level teleworking, it would have to obtain an Office of Personnel Management waiver that would be subject to congressional review.

Pat Fallon, R-Texas, said: “It is important to stress that this bill is not some radical notion. We are not ending all telework. We are just snapping back to 2019 pre-pandemic levels and ensuring a reasonable pathway for agencies to retain telework employees and, under the right conditions, allow for expansion of telework. The bottom line is the pandemic is over.”

Gerald Connolly, D-Va., said: “Federal telework participation rates have already decreased substantially….The most recent telework survey showed that 47 percent of federal employees teleworked in the last fiscal year, but the fact remains that increased availability of telework is here to stay in the private as well as the public sectors.”

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Democratic-led Senate, where it was likely to fail.


Voting 218 for and 211 against, the House on Feb. 2 adopted a resolution (H Res 76) that removed Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., from a seat on the Foreign Affairs Committee. She joined the panel in 2019. She is the first Somali-American and naturalized citizen of African birth to serve in Congress and one of the first two Muslim women to serve in the House, along with Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich. Citing Omar’s remarks on subjects such as Israel and the 9/11 attacks, and noting that she once equated the United States and Israel with Hamas and the Taliban in a discussion war crimes, the resolution asserted Omar has “disqualified herself from serving on the Committee on Foreign Affairs, a panel that is viewed by nations around the world as speaking for Congress on matters of international importance and national security….” In response, Omar said “I didn’t come to Congress to be silent….So take your vote or not, I am here to stay, and I am here to be a voice against the harms around the world and advocate for a better world.”

Max Miller, R-Ohio, said: “Given [Omar’s] biased comments against Israel and against the Jewish people, how can she serve as an objective decisionmaker on the committee? The facts are clear: Representative Omar has espoused anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rhetoric time and time again. She cannot be an objective contributor to the work of the committee and she has brought dishonor to the House of Representatives.”

Minority Whip Kathleen Clark, D-Mass., asked: “How can [Republicans] talk about integrity and honor as they empower the most extreme voices in their party? As they claim due process has been added in when there is none [for Omar]? As they promote conspiracy theories, as they stack some of our most critical committees with election deniers? It is too late to inject integrity into this sham process, but we, as members, can inject our own by voting `no’ on this resolution.”

A yes vote was to remove Omar from the committee.


Voting 328 for and 86 against, the House on Feb. 2 adopted a resolution (H Con Res 9) condemning “the horrors of socialism.” The non-binding measure states, in part: “Whereas the United States of America was founded on the belief in the sanctity of the individual, to which the collectivistic system of socialism in all of its forms is fundamentally and necessarily opposed…be it Resolved…That Congress denounces socialism in all its forms, and opposes the implementation of socialist policies in the United States of America.”

Alexander Mooney, R-W.Va., said: “As President Donald Trump said right here in this chamber in his State of the Union speech: `America will never be a socialist country.’ America must never give up on our God-given rights. We must fight against socialism and for the American Dream. When the government takes away your rights and freedoms, as the socialist and communist countries want to do, they never give them back. Every American should feel blessed to have been born in this country where we are free. Let’s protect our freedoms.”

Mark Takano, D-Calif., said: “With this resolution, Republicans demonize Social Security, on which more than 46 million retirees rely today. Republicans demonize Medicare, which has saved the lives of countless Americans. Republicans demonize many other federal programs, including benefits offered to our nation’s veterans. Harry Truman was right when he said that: `Socialism is a scare word that [Republicans] have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.’ “

A yes vote was to adopt the resolution.