ICYMI: Trump’s budget (aka the Big Ugly Bill) passed the Senate yesterday, but now it’s back to the House. House Democrats are holding the line and voting NO – but we need 4 Republicans to join us to tank this bill.
Stay tuned – we’re doing everything we can to stop this.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Democrat|California District 51
Sara Jacobs
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 567
Yes41%
No58%
Present1%
Not Voting0%
Party align98%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 51
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Sara Jacobs
U.S. RepresentativeDemocratCalifornia District 51
SoupScore
Sara's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 28 sponsored · 139 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Republicans’ budget would DEFUND Planned Parenthood, putting 200 health centers at risk of closure and taking away access to a health care provider for 1 million low-income people.
This would mean no more cancer screenings, STI treatments, or birth control for so many people.
The White House has resorted to blatant LYING because they’re scared of the truth: this bill will increase the deficit, kick millions off of health care, cut food assistance, and will help the ultra-rich the most.
This is not what the American people want, and Republicans know it.
Last time I checked, the American people want their costs to go down.
But Trump’s budget will make:
-Your food costs go up by slashing food assistance
-Your energy costs go up by killing wind and solar tax credits
-Your health care costs go up by cutting Medicaid and ACA subsidies
Senate Republicans just passed Trump’s horrific budget that will:
-Kick 16 million people off their health care
-Put 300 rural hospitals on the brink of closure
-Close 200 Planned Parenthoods
-Make millions more kids hungry
Now it’s coming back to the House. I’m voting NO.
Right now, Senate Democrats are forcing Republicans to vote on a huge slate of amendments.
For the record, Republicans are PRO: kicking millions off of Medicaid, hospital closures, gutting SNAP, slashing clean energy programs, and huge tax breaks for the ultra rich.
Food insecurity in San Diego has risen to levels we haven’t seen since the pandemic.
Why? Because of inflation, tariffs, rising costs, and supply chain issues.
What’s the GOP’s response? To cut SNAP, our best program to address food insecurity.🤦♀️
The facts are in: ICE isn’t going after criminals. We should expand legal pathways for undocumented people who aren’t criminals and who contribute to our economy – instead of deporting them.
I didn't hear anything from the classified briefing that convinced me Iran's uranium stockpiles were destroyed or that there was an imminent threat.
So bottom line: Trump's strikes were reckless, unnecessary, unconstitutional, and will make it harder to get a verifiable deal.
Every month, the San Diego Food Bank serves more than 400,000 San Diegans.
If the Senate version of the budget bill passes, that number will grow. This bill would worsen food insecurity, raise demand, and make food bank lines longer.
Republicans are doing everything they can to pass a bill that will gut health care access for millions of people across the country, including 5-year-old Delilah and 2-year-old Cesar.
Food insecurity is rising in all 50 states, and yet the Senate’s budget bill would enact the biggest cut to SNAP ever.
It would cut food assistance for:
❌Veterans
❌People who are homeless
❌Youth aging out of foster care
❌Stay-at-home parents
I had a great time celebrating Juneteenth last week at Chollas Lake! There were amazing local vendors, music, activities, and history. Even in these dark times, the joy and resilience of our community in San Diego shine through.
I was happy to join the long-running Cooper Family Foundation’s Juneteenth Celebration last weekend! The best antidote to the authoritarian attacks we’re facing is to build community, find strength in our diversity, and learn from our history.
The fight isn’t over. The merits battle now heads back to the lower courts – and we’ll be there every step of the way to defend the promise of the 14th Amendment.
On process, this ruling also makes it so much harder to undo any future unconstitutional actions by the president – basically, it will take a class action lawsuit in order to get broad relief across the country.
No vote. No passport. No equal protection. Limited due process. A safety net yanked away. That’s the human cost of eliminating birthright citizenship.
It would forever change who feels like they can belong, participate, and be protected here.
If President Trump ever managed to derail that promise, it would create a new sub-class of millions of people who were born here in the United States, but don’t have the same rights and benefits of citizenship.
Any effort to end birthright citizenship is flat-out unconstitutional.
It’s right there in the 14th Amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the U.S. … are citizens.”
The Supreme Court just released its opinion in the birthright citizenship case.
Here’s the big takeaway: the Court tightened the rules on when a single judge can issue a nationwide injunction, instead of deciding the fate of birthright citizenship. That’s still a big problem.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History567 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
567 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-01-16 | H.R. 30 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-16 | H.R. 30 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-01-15 | H.R. 33 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-15 | H.R. 144 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-15 | H.R. 164 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-14 | H.R. 28 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-14 | H.R. 28 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-01-14 | H.R. 153 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-14 | H.R. 152 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-13 | H.R. 192 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-09 | H.R. 23 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-07 | H.R. 29 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-03 | H. Res. 5 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-03 | H. Res. 5 (119th) | Motion to Commit with Instructions | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-01-03 | H. Res. 5 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-03 | — | Election of the Speaker | NOT_VOTING | — | — | Johnson (LA) |
| 2025-01-03 | — | Call by States | PRESENT | — | — | Passed |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.
← PrevPage 12 / 12