See how Veronica Escobar's votes line up with your values.
DeepSyte scores Veronica Escobar's record on the issues you care about — not party, not press releases. Take the 2-minute values quiz to see your personal alignment.
Sign in and take the values quiz to see how Veronica Escobar's votes line up with your views.
Prediction track record
How often we called Veronica Escobar's passage votes correctly, from their stated positions on each bill's tagged topics. Excludes “unclear” calls and abstentions.
To prohibit the disclosure of records by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development of individuals for the purposes of immigration enforcement, and for other purposes.
Based on 1 data point across public statements and recorded votes · AI analysis of public records
118-hr-2·Consistent
Secure the Border Act of 2023
92/100
What they said
May 13, 2026
Congresswoman Escobar opposes the Trump administration's use of eminent domain to seize land at Mt. Cristo Rey for border wall construction, citing the site's cultural and religious significance and arguing that alternative border security approaches exist.
Congresswoman Escobar's statement explicitly opposes the Trump administration's use of eminent domain to seize land at Mt. Cristo Rey for border wall construction, citing cultural and religious significance and arguing alternative border security approaches exist. The Secure the Border Act of 2023 mandates DHS resume border wall construction and requires at least 900 miles of border wall be built, with waivers of legal requirements to expedite construction. Her NO vote on passage is directly consistent with her stated opposition to border wall construction via eminent domain seizure.
Pairs with ambiguous language and high uncertainty are withheld until more data is available. Procedural, cloture, and amendment votes are excluded — they don't cleanly signal substantive support or opposition.
Pro analysis
AI rep analysis — Pro
Get an AI-narrated read on Veronica Escobar's full voting record against your stated values — aligned themes, conflicts, notable votes, and what to watch for.
Positions Veronica Escobar took during their campaign, scored against their subsequent record — public statements cross-checked with related votes. “Kept” means 80%+ of those statement-vs-vote pairs aligned; “Broken” means 30% or fewer.
0 kept0 broken0 mixed0 no action yet
Veronica Escobar has 22 tracked positions but no scored statement-vs-vote pairs touching them yet. Verdicts will appear here as related statements and votes accumulate.
No action yetSupports
The government should provide healthcare for everyone.
“I believe healthcare is a human right. That's why I support Medicare for All to guarantee every American has access to comprehensive, affordable care.”
People who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children should have a path to citizenship.
“The Dignity Act creates a pathway to legal status for long-term undocumented immigrants, protects Dreamers, expands legal pathways for workers and families”
The U.S. should allow more legal immigration each year.
“My plan takes a practical, common-sense approach: strengthening border management, modernizing legal immigration, and restoring dignity to people navigating a broken system.”
The government should set legally enforceable limits on greenhouse gas emissions.
“I served on the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis and helped pass the largest investment in clean energy in our nation's history— cutting emissions, lowering energy costs”
Passage votes where Veronica Escobar broke ranks with ≥75% of Democrats. Threshold catches substantively partisan splits; unanimous-ish or close votes are excluded.
Congresswoman Escobar Introduces Bill to Improve Port Staffing, Infrastructure Needs
Position: Introduces the Port Staffing Reporting Act, which would require the Department of Homeland Security to assess staffing levels, operational challenges, and infrastructure needs at U.S. ports of entry.
This week, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (TX-16) introduced the Port Staffing Reporting Act, legislation requiring the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to assess staffing levels, operational challenges, and infrastructure needs at ports of entry across the United States.
Congresswoman Escobar Statement on Fort Bliss Data Center Project Update
Position: The release describes the congresswoman's requests that the public and local representatives be kept informed and allowed to voice concerns and ask questions about the Fort Bliss data center project, and expresses gratitude for the Army and Carlyle Group's continued engagement.
Today, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (TX-16) released the following statement after attending a community stakeholder meeting on the Fort Bliss data center project:
“Today, the Army and Carlyle Group held a meeting of El Paso community stakeholders to discuss the latest updates on the Fort Bliss data center.
"Since March, when my team and I first learned of this project, we have asked that the public and local representatives be kept in the loop and be allowed to voice their concerns and ask questions. I’m grateful to the Army and Carlyle for their continued engagement.
"I’ve consistently had a number of requests, including that they:
Congresswoman Escobar Sends Navy Letter Requesting More Information on the Use of Swine in Diving Experiments
Position: The release requests information from the Department of the Navy on its funding of swine testing in hyperbaric diving experiments and on whether non-animal alternatives were exhausted. It expresses concern about animal welfare in this research.
Yesterday, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (TX-16), joined by Representatives Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Mark Pocan (WI-2) and Dina Titus (NV-1), sent a letter to Department of the Navy Secretary Hung Cao requesting more information on the use of swine in hyperbaric diving experiments.
The full letter can be found here or below:
We are writing to express our strong concern regarding the Department of the Navy funded research projects involving the use of swine in hyperbaric diving experiments, specifically the recent study conducted at Duke University utilizing animal models to test breathing gas switches involving carbon tetrafluoride.
While we recognize the vital importance of ensuring the safety, health, and operational readiness of our divers and submariners, we remain deeply troubled by the continued reliance on animal testing when novel scientific methods and advanced models exist and should be fully exhausted. Specifically, the research recently published titled "Isobaric counterdiffusion of carbon tetrafluoride breathing gas to prevent severe decompression sickness" subjected juvenile swine to extreme pressure profiles, rapid decompressions, and severe physiological distress to evaluate decompression sickness mitigation, leading to mortality for some of the swine.
As advocates for animal welfare standards, we question whether the Department has thoroughly exhausted non-animal methodologies. We request that the Department of the Navy provide responses to the following questions within 30 days:
Have there been insistences on where alternative methods are the preferred method to live, animal testing? If so, what were the reasonings behind those decisions and the effectiveness of the results?
What specific validation protocols are used to ensure that all non-animal testing alternatives are fully exhausted before any animal models are approved for use?
Does the Navy enforce protocols or data-sharing agreements to prevent redundant animal testing on the same research questions across different laboratories or research groups
How many total studies are planned under this overarching research initiative, and what is the projected timeline for concluding all associated animal testing?
What specific military or operational necessity required the use of live pigs rather than advanced computer or lab-based modeling for this research? What total amount of federal funding from the Department of Defense has been allocated to institutions for animal testing over the past five fiscal years?
What specific steps are being taken by the Navy to transition toward non-animal methods?
Our national security and the health of our service members are paramount, but we must achieve these goals ethically and responsibly. We look forward to your prompt response and to working together to ensure taxpayer funds support both naval innovation and high standards of animal welfare.
Representatives Escobar, Rivas Lead 45 of Their Colleagues in Demanding ICE to Restore Detainee Details Back to ODLS
Position: Members of Congress urge ICE to restore detainee location information for individuals with final removal orders to the Online Detainee Locator System and to provide Congress with the justification for the policy change.
Today, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (TX-16) and Congresswoman Luz Rivas (CA-29) led 45 of their colleagues in a letter urging U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director David Venturella to restore detainee details to the Online Detainee Locator System (ODLS). The Members’ letter comes after a disturbing report from the Associated Press revealed that ICE began removing individuals with final orders of removal from ODLS. ODLS allows family members, legal representatives, and members of the public to locate individuals detained by ICE.
On September 21, 2026, the Associated Press reported that ICE began removing individuals with final orders of removal from ODLS on September 15, 2026. This change in policy was not publicly announced, and was not communicated to detainees’ families or legal representation. The Washington Post also reported that ICE’s new policy bars immigration officials from sharing information with their attorneys or relatives by phone.
The full letter can be found here or below:
Dear Acting Director Venturella:
We write with serious concern regarding a recent report from the Associated Press (AP) that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) implemented a policy change to its Online Detainee Locator System (ODLS) on September 15, 2026, so that individuals with final removal orders from an immigration court no longer appear in the searchable database while they remain in ICE custody. ODLS is a public system that allows family members, legal representatives, and members of the public to locate individuals detained by ICE. We urge ICE to restore ODLS location in- formation for all individuals with final removal orders who remain in ICE custody and to provide Congress with the justification underlying this change. The federal government should not be denying any individual access to legal counsel or shielding their whereabouts from loved ones.
ICE created ODLS so that family members, legal representatives, and members of the public can locate individuals in immigration custody. On September 21, 2026, AP reported that ICE began removing individuals with final orders of removal from ODLS on September 15, 2026. ICE has not publicly announced this change in policy and has not communicated to detainees’ families or legal representation where detainees are currently held who have disappeared from ODLS. The Washington Post also reported that ICE’s new policy bars immigration officials from sharing information with their attorneys or relatives by phone, information that ICE has been providing for decades. This is a wholly unprecedented move by the United States government to impede both access and legal representation for people in federal custody. It is also contrary to foundational principles of the American legal system, where there is a general right to know where a prisoner is being held.
The consequences of this change extend beyond public transparency. Immigration attorneys have reported losing track of clients after they disappeared from ODLS, while family members are un- certain whether their loved ones were transferred to another facility or removed from the United States completely. For families, this uncertainty in suddenly losing contact with a loved one can lead to anxiety, trauma, and the continued mistrust of the federal government. Detainees may be held in facilities thousands of miles away from their homes, and while ICE maintains that detainees have access to phones while in custody, detainees are not always able to place phone calls due to the cost of the calls, high demand for phone usage, or a combination of these and other factors. Attorneys have warned that losing access to a detainee’s location can interfere with communication and make time-sensitive legal challenges more difficult to pursue, especially where venue for litigation depends on knowing where someone is physically detained. Individuals with final orders of removal may still have pending legal claims or other avenues for relief, making continued access to counsel especially important.
Individuals with final orders of removal are routinely held in ICE custody for days, weeks, or months. Some individuals with final orders cannot be rapidly deported due to difficulty obtaining travel documents, or logistical challenges. Others have been granted protection from deportation to their home country and remain detained for substantial periods of time while ICE appeals the decision or seeks a third country of removal. Under ICE’s new policy, these individuals will be hidden from the public, with their lawyers and family members having no way to determine where they are being held at any time.
This unprecedented policy also substantially interferes with the oversight capacity of Members of Congress from locating constituents who have been detained by ICE and the ability of detainees’ legal counsel to determine where an individual is being held.
As part of our Congressional oversight responsibilities, we request a response to the following information by October 14, 2026:
Representatives Escobar, Bacon Introduce Bill to Prevent Military Families from Losing Access to Nutrition Benefits
Position: The release supports introduction of the Nutrition Continuity for Military Families Act of 2026, which would ensure military families enrolled in WIC keep access to benefits during permanent changes of station and require DoD to notify eligible service members upon receipt of PCS orders.
Today, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (TX-16) and Congressman Don Bacon (NE-2) introduced the Nutrition Continuity for Military Families Act of 2026. This bill would ensure that at-risk military families do not lose access to crucial supplemental nutritional benefits through the Women, Infant, and Children (WIC) program while conducting military required permanent changes of station (PCS).
"Receiving orders to move around the country or the world is one of the most stressful sacrifices a military family can make," said Congresswoman Escobar. "It's critical that when families conduct a permanent change of station, Congress and the military make this drastic change as smooth as possible. The last thing they should be worried about is the transferring of their nutrition assistance. My bipartisan bill addresses this by ensuring military families have the resources and tools at their disposal to ensure they have food on the table.”
"Food costs are one of the biggest financial pressures on military families right now, and WIC benefits are a lifeline for many of them," said Shannon Razsadin, Military Family Advisory Network CEO. "Our own research backs that up: the Military Family 360° Survey found 41.2% of military families report low or very low food security, up from 15.6% just two years ago, and families who've recently moved due to military orders are among the hardest hit. Families report WIC benefit coverage gaps when they relocate, and some don't even know they qualify in the first place. This legislation fixes both problems: it helps families know what they're eligible for and ensures those benefits don't lapse just because they got new orders. That's real financial stability for the families who need it most, and it strengthens the readiness of our all-volunteer force."
"Military families should not lose access to nutrition assistance simply because of a permanent change of station," said Lt. General Brian Kelly, USAF, (Ret), President and CEO of the Military Officers Association of American (MOAA). "Even a short interruption in WIC benefits can mean going without essential support during an already stressful relocation. MOAA thanks Representatives Escobar and Bacon for introducing bipartisan legislation to ensure military families enrolled in WIC are immediately eligible for benefits at their next duty station. This will provide continuity of support, reduce financial strain, and improve military readiness by allowing servicemembers to remain focused on their mission."
Require the DoD to notify service members upon receipt of PCS orders, if they are likely to fall within the category of income eligibility for WIC based on their grade/rank and time in service. The target category include:
enlisted service members undergoing a PCS with one or more dependents
pregnant enlisted service members
enlisted service members with pregnant spouses
enlisted servicemembers who meet the following service criteria:
serving an initial term of enlistment
serving in a paygrade of E-4 of below or,
have completed less than 10 years of service and is serving in the paygrade of E-5 or E-6.
Require that state agencies issue a Verification of Certification card to covered members at the time of certification or recertification, ensuring their continued access to program benefits
Require DoD to ensure that every military installation is staffed at least three days a week by a DoD employee knowledgeable of the WIC program and with resources to direct families to local agencies to complete enrollment and manage benefits. These offices will provide readily available resources to military families who may be challenged to access local agencies located off the installation.
Congresswoman Escobar Statement on Eminent Domain Action of Mt. Cristo Rey
Position: Congresswoman Escobar opposes the Trump administration's use of eminent domain to seize land at Mt. Cristo Rey for border wall construction, citing the site's cultural and religious significance and arguing that alternative border security approaches exist.
Today, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (TX-16) released the following statement in response to reports that the Trump administration has filed an eminent domain suit for possession of nearly 15 acres of land at Mt. Cristo Rey:
“Mt. Cristo Rey's cultural and religious significance is central to our region. Seizing this community asset in order to build a border wall is consistent with the Trump administration’s blatant disregard for what communities like ours value.
“There are a number of other ways to provide border security. Instead, the Trump administration prefers to destroy this sacred site.
“I support the Catholic Diocese of Las Cruces in their opposition to the federal government’s actions to degrade a site so significant to our shared identity, and I have reached out to my New Mexico colleagues so we can collaborate on ways to save this site.”
Texas Tribune: U.S. Rep Veronica Escobar's bipartisan immigration bill draws GOP support - and backlash
Position: Rep. Escobar advocates for the Dignidad Act, a bipartisan immigration reform bill that would provide a pathway to work and travel authorization for long-term undocumented residents, mandate employer verification of work authorization, and maintain a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients, while removing a broader pathway to citizenship for other undocumented immigrants.
WASHINGTON — When Democrats took control of Washington after the 2020 election, Rep. Veronica Escobar thought comprehensive immigration reform was within reach.
The El Paso Democrat helped craft a bill party leaders introduced at the start of Joe Biden’s term to create an eight-year pathway to citizenship for the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the country. But the Democratic legislation never got enough buy-in within the party and was deemed a non-starter by Republicans.
The episode was instructive for Escobar, who succeeded Beto O’Rourke in Congress halfway through Donald Trump’s first term and, in short order, made her name as an authority on immigration among House Democrats.
“It was a real wake-up call for me on the politics within my own party,” Escobar said. “It really was during that first two years of the Biden administration that I realized, No. 1, we’re not going to get this done as a Democratic-only bill. No. 2, it really is going to need to be bipartisan if it’s going to stick. And No. 3, I think we’re going to lose elections because of immigration.”
After Republicans rode the issue to a House majority in 2022, Escobar changed tack. She teamed up with Republican Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar, a Cuban American who represents a heavily Hispanic district anchored in Miami, to write an immigration reform bill called the Dignidad, or Dignity, Act. Crafted “in some respects in secret” to avoid momentum-sapping backlash, Escobar said, the compromise that emerged included a pathway to work and travel authorization for long-term undocumented residents and a mandate for employers to check staffers’ work authorization status.
They re-introduced the bill last year, with a key change to make it more palatable to Republicans, as the political battlefield on immigration was veering from the now-quiet border to Trump’s mass deportation push.
In turn, the new Dignity Act has sparked an emerging debate that reflects the shifting political realities for both parties around immigration. Democrats, acknowledging that some Biden-era immigration policies were out of step with the electorate, reined in a key sticking point of the bill’s prior version by removing the pathway to citizenship beyond DACA recipients. Yet, there would still be a way for undocumented immigrants to get temporary legal status, a point that’s the crux of the GOP’s disjointed response to the bill.
What emerges is a picture of an uneasy Republican coalition in which business leaders, grassroots conservatives and the Hispanic voters who helped power Trump’s 2024 victory all lack alignment on how to proceed.
Through the careful building of a coalition — Escobar and Salazar only let cosponsors join in bipartisan pairs — the Dignity Act is now up to 40 cosponsors, half in each party. In Texas, that includes Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, and Rep. Monica De La Cruz, R-Edinburg, both in the moderate wings of their party.
But at the same time, the Dignity Act has unearthed a wave of conservative opposition, led by a fellow Texan, Flower Mound freshman Rep. Brandon Gill. Gill has been the tip of the spear in the pressure campaign against the bill, calling it a betrayal of conservative values and tantamount to offering amnesty, a dead letter in the GOP.
“The glue that held that [2024 GOP] coalition together was the mass deportation message that we ran on, because that is something that — particularly for working-class voters — resonates,” Gill said. “Because they’re the ones whose communities are being transformed. They’re the ones whose wages are being suppressed or whose jobs are being taken by this mass influx of illegal aliens that Democrats, by the way, created.”
To that end, Gill, an emerging force in the GOP, has sparred with Salazar about the bill on social media and made a point of endorsing candidates in Republican primaries who share his commitment to a more hardline immigration policy.
The Dignity Act doesn’t have support from GOP House leadership, and has no obvious pathway to passage at the moment. But despite the backlash, Escobar still sees a window — though narrow — for action, especially as Trump’s polling on immigration slips.
“There is an acknowledgment from the [Republican] side that the status quo cannot remain,” Escobar said. “I do think this is the moment. If we don’t get it done before August recess, it’s going to be really hard to get it done in the future.”
For decades, the basis of any immigration compromise has been a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants — a priority for many Democrats — in exchange for heightened border security, a Republican priority, and stricter employment verification. Efforts to break through the impasse have repeatedly fallen short, establishing bipartisan immigration reform as one of Congress’ legislative white whales.
The Dignity Act has a different framework. It includes a modified version of the DREAM Act, which would offer conditional permanent residency status and eventual citizenship to DACA recipients, or people brought to the U.S. as children who have lived most of their lives here.
But aside from Dreamers, there’s no pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants in the bill — the key change from the 2023 version. Instead, they can earn legal status through the Dignity Program — a seven-year pathway contingent on passing a criminal background check, paying $7,000 in restitution plus taxes owed and providing proof that the applicant worked or was in school for at least four of the seven years. Dignity status, which authorizes holders to work and travel freely, would last for seven years and could be renewed indefinitely for recipients in good standing.
“Dignity is not amnesty,” Salazar said at a press conference last year. “Dignity does not grant a path to citizenship to anybody. Dignity is the Solomonic way to fix a 40-year problem.”
Crucially, the Dignity Program is only eligible to immigrants who arrived in the U.S. before the end of 2020 — meaning any migrants from the Biden era are ineligible. And those who have achieved Dignity status are barred from claiming means-tested federal benefits or entitlement programs.
Escobar said a common criticism she heard “and totally understood” during the Biden administration was frustration over new arrivals getting work authorization while older immigrants who had been in the U.S. for decades never did.
“Even within the immigrant community, with mixed-status families, there was a sense that it was profoundly unfair,” Escobar said. “And this bill tackles that head-on.”
The funds generated from the Dignity program would go to apprenticeship and skills training programs for U.S. citizens.
The bill also reforms asylum and employment practices and bolsters border security. It phases in a requirement that employers use E-Verify to confirm the work authorization status of their employees. It funds border security infrastructure, including “physical barriers,” and technology and raises pay for some Border Patrol agents. And it overhauls how asylum works, including an end to the controversial catch-and-release practice.
Asylum cases would need to be determined within 60 days, and applicants would be screened and held in newly built humanitarian campuses. Those whose asylum cases are denied or who fail their credible fear interview, which establishes eligibility for asylum based on potential for persecution or torture in their home country, would be subject to expedited removal.
In addition, the bill would expand opportunities for legal immigration, doubling the per-country annual cap for green cards, removing children and spouses from being counted toward caps on employment-based visas, and making changes aimed at whittling down visa backlogs.
As Republicans attempt to hold their coalition together for the midterms, Gill said he sees immigration policy — and mass deportation — as a unifying force, especially for keeping working-class voters under the GOP tent.
“That’s the glue that held the coalition together,” Gill said. “So I think to betray that, to go back on our word on the core thesis of the last election cycle, from a political standpoint, would fracture and, in many ways, just dissolve that coalition entirely.”
Across the Republican conference, Gill said there is “virtually no tolerance or appetite for amnesty of any kind.” He said GOP members who support the bill have told him they are mainly interested in codifying border security. But he thinks Democrats cannot be trusted on the issue.
Salazar argues the exact opposite, telling Politico that “what I’m doing is I’m really trying to preserve the Republican base that gave victory to Trump,” particularly the new Hispanic voter converts.
A White House official said the Trump administration is “always happy” to review congressional proposals but declined to weigh in further on the bill, saying they were “focused on enforcing the current immigration laws and deporting the millions and millions of criminal illegal aliens that Joe Biden let in our country.”
Among Dignity Act supporters, the list of cosponsors includes numerous members in competitive districts, but also some of the more ideologically driven politicians in both parties. Escobar said there’s a Democratic wait list for members to get on the bill once they can be paired with a new GOP cosponsor.
The proposal has earned the support of business groups and immigration advocates alike, from the libertarian group Americans for Prosperity to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the liberal pro-immigration group FWD.us.
In the Lone Star State, the Texas Business Leadership Council and the Texas Restaurant Association have signed on as endorsers.
Justin Yancy, the president of the TBLC, said he often hears from construction and agriculture industry leaders, in particular, about the need for immigration reform. While his organization strongly supports the goal of a secure border, Yancy said, he also wants to see new pathways to legal immigration, such as those in the Dignity Act, in order to meet labor needs.
A mass deportation strategy, by contrast, is not economically viable, he said.
“Deporting everyone would be catastrophic for the economy — not just in Texas, but around the country,” Yancy said. “That’s just a nonstarter.”
Texas, Yancy said, needs “more employees, not fewer”. And people eligible for Dignity status under the bill would not be taking jobs, he said, given labor shortages that are causing economic upheaval in key industries.
The vociferous opposition of Gill and others speaks to the increasingly strained relationship between big business groups and the GOP. Gill said if the GOP wants to be the party of the working class, it has to reject business’ arguments on immigration.
“Mass migration does, in many ways, at least in the short term, benefit large businesses who basically view these people as labor input,” Gill said. “But the people who are harmed are the people whose jobs are taken away. And those are the people who don’t have fancy lobbyists in Washington, who can’t spend millions of dollars on political campaigns, but they’re the ones who show up and vote.”
But while Gill still sees immigration as Republicans’ strongest issue, Escobar thinks there’s an opening for bipartisanship.
She saw the recent head-rolling at the Department of Homeland Security, including the ouster of Kristi Noem as secretary and Greg Bovino as Border Patrol sector chief, as evidence that the White House recognized it needed to change tactics on immigration.
“Does that mean they will embrace the Dignity Act?” Escobar said. “I think it depends on whether a lot of these groups lobby the White House directly. Because ultimately, if Donald Trump gives his blessing, it’s done.”
Congresswoman Escobar Cosponsors Energy Bills Relief Act
Position: Congresswoman Escobar supports the Energy Bills Relief Act, which expands renewable energy deployment to lower utility costs for consumers and prevent corporations from passing energy infrastructure costs to ratepayers.
RESOURCES FOR DHS EMPLOYEES CAN BE FOUND HERE
This week, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (TX-16) joined over 130 House Democrats led by the House Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition (SEEC) Clean Energy Deployment Task Force Co-Chairs Reps. Mike Levin (CA-49) and Sean Casten (IL-06) on the Energy Bills Relief Act, a family- and consumer-focused approach to United States energy policy that ensures Americans have access to the most reliable and low-cost source of power available – renewable energy.
“Hardworking Americans are already facing skyrocketing utility bills, so it’s no wonder rate payers are afraid of being saddled with utility cost increases that might come from energy-intensive data centers," said Congresswoman Escobar. "I'm proud to cosponsor the Energy Bills Relief Act, which would ensure consumers aren't on the hook for higher energy costs. Corporations have been unwilling to meaningfully engage with communities or be transparent about their data centers, so we can’t risk them passing on their costs to consumers as well; this legislation provides guardrails to prevent that from happening."
Electricity rates are surging nationwide, and millions of households are struggling to pay their rising energy bills. The most effective way to lower utility costs for American households is to expand access to renewable energy — the most reliable and low-cost energy source.
We have the tools to power America with abundant, reliable, American-made clean energy. The missing link between those tools and expanded access to that low-cost and efficient energy is a consumer-first energy policy.
For too long, U.S. energy policy has boosted the profits of energy producers at the expense of energy consumers. The Energy Bills Relief Act shifts our focus to lowering costs and increasing reliability for American homes and businesses by deploying more renewable energy. It is firmly rooted in the American values of choice and competition. It prioritizes consumers and ensures access to low-cost energy for our homes, businesses, and economy.
Congresswoman Escobar Statement on FISA Reauthorization Bill
Position: Section 702 of FISA is a valuable intelligence tool, but Congress must strengthen protections for Americans' constitutional rights and civil liberties, particularly in response to the Trump Administration's approach to surveillance.
RESOURCES FOR DHS EMPLOYEES CAN BE FOUND HERE
Today, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (TX-16) released the following statement on the FISA reauthorization bill:
“Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is a powerful tool for collecting foreign intelligence and helping keep our country safe. But with that power comes a real responsibility to protect the constitutional rights and civil liberties of the American people. The Trump Administration has engaged in a whole-of-government approach to overriding Americans’ civil liberties and constitutional rights, and Congress must use every opportunity to protect our citizens from this administration.
TRANSCRIPT: Congresswoman Escobar Provides Opening Remarks on Republican Budget Bill
Position: Congresswoman Escobar opposes the FY2026 budget resolution, citing concerns about cuts to Medicare and nutrition assistance, failure to renew ACA subsidies, increased funding for ICE and CBP, and the overall economic impact on American families from tariffs and inflation.
RESOURCES FOR DHS EMPLOYEES CAN BE FOUND HERE
This afternoon, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (TX-16) provided opening remarks at the the FY2026 Budget Resolution at the House of Representatives Committee on Rules, which begins the Senate-led reconciliation process.
The video can be found here and a (lightly edited) transcript has been provided below:
Rules Committee Chairwoman Virginia Fox: Miss Escobar, you're recognized.
Congresswoman Escobar: Thank you so much, Chairwoman Fox and Ranking Member McGovern. I'm here to voice my strong opposition to this budget resolution, both because of its outrageous spending allocations and because of my serious concerns with the process of how this was done.
It's important for everyone to understand what is happening in America today. Americans are struggling. The latest Gallup poll shows that nearly half of American adults - 47% - describe American's current economic conditions as poor. That's up from 40% one month ago, and it's clear why they feel this way.
Republicans' so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill," slashed access to Medicare and Nutrition Assistance programs. Republicans refuse to renew subsidies that helped Americans pay for their health insurance, causing their premiums to shoot up by 114%.
Trump's tariffs have cost the average family more than $1,700 in 2025 alone, and now his war in Iran has made gas prices skyrocket and prices are likely to get worse.
Instead of focusing on how we stop this economic collapse, Republicans are demanding an additional $70 billion, potentially as high as $140 billion, for CPB and ICE. The One Big Beautiful Bill, which provides tax breaks to billionaires by making drastic cuts to programs Americans depend on, also gave ICE and CBP $140 billion. This was for President Trump's mass deportation program, but that $140 billion could fund the entire Department of Homeland Security through next year.
So why are we really here? In the wake of the killings of Renée Good and Alex Pretti, Republicans are choosing to jam through additional funding for ICE and CBP instead of working with us to find bipartisan solutions that both protect our communities and ensure that ICE and CBP are just as accountable to the public as normal law enforcement agencies are.
I have the privilege of sitting on both the House Budget Committee with my colleague and friend, Mr. Arrington. I also sit on the House Appropriations Committee, and this partisan approach to government funding is not the way we should do things. The original Homeland Security Appropriations bill that passed out of the committee had protections for U.S. Citizens against what we saw in Minneapolis and many other American cities. But Donald Trump and Stephen Miller stripped out those protections because they knew they could do this: use Republicans in Congress to jam through a bill that grossly inflates these agencies' budgets, and also clears the way for a supplemental defense package that will fund the president's war in Iran, a war that has already cost us an estimated $50 billion.
Let's be clear: Section 4108 of this bill sets the stage for a future supplemental defense funding package, without us knowing what the actual cost of that will be. Just two weeks ago, during a hearing in the Budget Committee, I asked the OMB Director, Mr. Vought, if he could tell me how much would be requested in the Iran supplemental, and he either couldn't tell me or he wouldn't tell me. He wouldn't even ballpark it.
We should not be clearing the way to fund Trump's war of choice, which has not only driven up the cost of everyday essentials, but more importantly, resulted in the death of 13 American service members.
Frankly, I am astonished to see my colleagues in the House of Representatives rubber stamp this. This budget resolution will allow Senate Republicans to jam the House with little to no consideration. By allowing the Senate to move on reconciliation first, that means the House will not be able to hold any committee markups and will instead have to eat whatever the Senate passed reconciliation bill includes.
I am going to be voting no on this rule, no on the concurrent resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. We have an obligation to treat a matter as serious as increasing the deficit with the attention it deserves.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
Source: GDELT 2.0 GKG, filtered to a curated list of national outlets. Inclusion is not endorsement; opinion pieces and reported news are mixed.
Recent stock activity
Periodic transaction reports filed under the STOCK Act — disclosed by the rep, sourced from public filings.
No disclosed trades on record.
Source: open-data mirrors of the Senate eFD and House Clerk financial-disclosure systems. Disclosure within 30 days of trade is required by law (45 for spouse/dependent trades).
Top PAC donors · 2026 cycle
Political action committees that gave the most to this rep's principal campaign committee this cycle. PAC giving is direct organizational support — industry, ideological, or leadership.
1.AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, AFL-CIO COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL EDUCATIONLabor2 contributionsTrade-union PAC for teachers — backs candidates supporting public education funding, collective bargaining rights, and worker protections.AI$10,000
2.DELOITTE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE3 contributions$10,000
3.L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. PAC5 contributions$10,000
4.HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL PACDefense7 contributionsDefense and aerospace contractor PAC — backs candidates supporting federal defense spending, military modernization, and aerospace manufacturing.AI$10,000
5.AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES P E O P L E3 contributions$7,500
6.AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR JUSTICE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE3 contributions$7,500
8.ELECT DEMOCRATIC WOMENIdeological7 contributionsIdeological PAC focused on electing women to federal office. Backs Democratic female candidates across districts and states.AI$6,500
9.BUILD PAC OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOME BUILDERS (BUILDPAC)2 contributions$6,000
10.NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ASSOCIATION PAC4 contributions$6,000
Source: OpenFEC (api.open.fec.gov) Schedule A receipts where contributor type is “committee.” Aggregated by contributing committee. Self-transfers from joint-fundraising / victory committees are excluded.
Top individual contributors · 2026 cycle
Itemized individual contributions over $200 to this rep's campaign committee, aggregated by donor employer. PAC giving is shown above; this section is people, not organizations.
1.WESTSTAR BANK$11,250
2.INKIT$10,500
3.JOBE MATERIALS$7,000
4.TROPICANA BUILDING$7,000
5.HOUGHTON FINANCIAL$7,000
6.GORDON DAVIS$7,000
7.WINDSTAR LPG$7,000
8.TRANSTELCO$7,000
9.FOX AUTO$7,000
10.W SILVER RECYCLING$7,000
Source: OpenFEC Schedule A receipts where contributor type is “individual,” aggregated by the donor's self-reported employer. This is a geographic / industry correlation, not a corporate endorsement.
