Representative Janice 'Jan' D. Schakowsky's Political Positions

Office: U.S. House (IL) - District 9, Democratic
Project Vote Smart does not permit the use of its name or programs in any campaign activity, including advertising, debates, and speeches.
Jan Schakowsky has refused to provide voters with positions on key issues covered by the 2014 Political Courage Test, despite repeated requests. Jan Schakowsky is still welcome to submit the test at any time.

What is the Political Courage Test?

This candidate has demonstrated 0% courage during the test.

*Note: This percentage is calculated based on the number of issue areas addressed by the candidate on the Political Courage Test at the conclusion of the testing period. It does not indicate support or lack of support by Project Vote Smart.

Issue Positions

In response to the increasing unwillingness of candidates to answer issue questions, Project Vote Smart has researched Presidential and Congressional candidates' public records to determine candidates' likely responses on certain key issues. These are provided below as a courtesy to voters.

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Abortions should always be legal." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding abortion. Other or expanded principles: "Military women serving abroad should have access to abortions."
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 748. 109th Congress. Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 04/27/2005. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 3. 112th Congress. Prohibiting Taxpayer Funding of Abortion. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 05/04/2011. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 6099. 110th Congress. Abortion Pain Bill. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 12/06/2006. (votesmart.org)
  • Planned Parenthood. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of Planned Parenthood 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 3660. 106th Congress. Ban on Partial-Birth/Late Term Abortion. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 04/05/2000. (votesmart.org)
  • Planned Parenthood. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Planned Parenthood endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2012 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • NARAL Pro-Choice America. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. NARAL Pro-Choice America endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2012 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • National Right to Life Committee. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 0 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • National Women's Political Caucus. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. National Women's Political Caucus endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2012 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Planned Parenthood. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Planned Parenthood endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2010 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 882. 106th Congress. Prison Abortion Funding Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 06/22/2000. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 1017. 106th Congress. Abortion Funding Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 07/20/2000. (votesmart.org)
  • NARAL Pro-Choice America. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 509. 111th Congress. Prohibiting Federally Funded Abortion Services. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 11/07/2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Family Research Council. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Family Research Council 0 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • National Organization for Women. 04/18/2012. "On the votes used to calculate its ratings, the National Organization for Women attaches more value to those votes it considers more important. For 2008, the National Organization for Women gave Jan Schakowsky a rating of 100 percent." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H AMDT 209. 109th Congress. Overseas Military Facilities Abortion Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 05/25/2005. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. S 403. 110th Congress. Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 09/26/2006. (votesmart.org)
  • National Women's Political Caucus. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. National Women's Political Caucus endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2006 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 722. 106th Congress. Oversea Military Abortions Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 05/18/2000. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 95. 112th Congress. Prohibiting Use of Federal Funds For Planned Parenthood. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 02/18/2011. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. 27 April 2005. "Mr. Chairman, I stand today in strong opposition to H.R. 748, the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. It is a direct attack on a woman's right to choose, it endangers women's health, and it forces young women facing unintended pregnancies to choose between dealing with it on their own or enlisting the help of a trusted adult who could possibly be put in jail as a result." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2003. 26 February 2004. "If we want to go after protecting pregnant women, we ought to go after protecting pregnant women, not about threatening to take away their right to choose..." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Statement on the Nomination of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court. 31 October 2005. "Rather than picking a conservative judge whose values are consistent with those of most Americans, President Bush has nominated a judge whose rulings have been out of the mainstream on a woman's right to choose..." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Statement on 35th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade. 22 January 2008. "Thirty five years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision to federally protect a woman's right to choose. Roe v. Wade brought an end to decades of state and federal laws that outlawed or restricted abortions. This historic decision put reproductive choice back in the hands of women and gave them safe, medical options." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Anti-Choice Law A Non-Starter For Schakowsky. 10 November 2009. "In the critical fight to reform our health care system and expand access, we cannot marginalize women by forcing them to pay more for their care or limiting their access to a legal medical procedure. If left as is the health care reform bill would be the largest repeal of anti-choice laws in nearly four decades. It is not a continuation of current law as the proponents claim. The pro-choice caucus worked night and day to find an acceptable compromise that all parties could support including prohibiting one penny of federal dollars for abortions. I will continue to work with the Senate and the Conference Committee to make the bill acceptable, but cannot and will not support health care reform that blatantly discriminates against women." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Pro-choice" for: "a) Do you consider yourself pro-choice or pro-life?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Abortions should always be illegal."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Abortions should always be illegal."
  • NARAL Pro-Choice America. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. NARAL Pro-Choice America endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2012 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Planned Parenthood. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Planned Parenthood endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2012 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 3660. 106th Congress. Ban on Partial-Birth/Late Term Abortion. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 04/05/2000. (votesmart.org)
  • Planned Parenthood. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of Planned Parenthood 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 6099. 110th Congress. Abortion Pain Bill. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 12/06/2006. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 3. 112th Congress. Prohibiting Taxpayer Funding of Abortion. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 05/04/2011. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 748. 109th Congress. Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 04/27/2005. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 156. 106th Congress. Overseas Military Abortion Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 06/09/1999. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 882. 106th Congress. Prison Abortion Funding Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 06/22/2000. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2003. 26 February 2004. "If we want to go after protecting pregnant women, we ought to go after protecting pregnant women, not about threatening to take away their right to choose..." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Statement on the Nomination of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court. 31 October 2005. "Rather than picking a conservative judge whose values are consistent with those of most Americans, President Bush has nominated a judge whose rulings have been out of the mainstream on a woman's right to choose..." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Statement on 35th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade. 22 January 2008. "Thirty five years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision to federally protect a woman's right to choose. Roe v. Wade brought an end to decades of state and federal laws that outlawed or restricted abortions. This historic decision put reproductive choice back in the hands of women and gave them safe, medical options." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Anti-Choice Law A Non-Starter For Schakowsky. 10 November 2009. "In the critical fight to reform our health care system and expand access, we cannot marginalize women by forcing them to pay more for their care or limiting their access to a legal medical procedure. If left as is the health care reform bill would be the largest repeal of anti-choice laws in nearly four decades. It is not a continuation of current law as the proponents claim. The pro-choice caucus worked night and day to find an acceptable compromise that all parties could support including prohibiting one penny of federal dollars for abortions. I will continue to work with the Senate and the Conference Committee to make the bill acceptable, but cannot and will not support health care reform that blatantly discriminates against women." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Pro-choice" for: "a) Do you consider yourself pro-choice or pro-life?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Abortions should always be illegal."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Abortions should always be illegal."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Abortions should always be legal." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding abortion. Other or expanded principles: "Military women serving abroad should have access to abortions."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "g) Medicare, Medicaid, and federal subsidies should be prohibited from being used on abortion procedures."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "e) Should federal subsidies be prohibited from being used for abortion procedures?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "f) Eliminate public funding for abortions and public funding of organizations that advocate or perform abortions."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "g) Prohibit public funding of abortions and of organizations that advocate or perform abortions."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Abortions should always be legal." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding abortion. Other or expanded principles: "Military women serving abroad should have access to abortions. Medicaid should cover full range of reproductive health services, including abortions."
  • NARAL Pro-Choice America. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. NARAL Pro-Choice America endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2006 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Abortions should always be illegal."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "f) Prohibit public funding of abortions and to organizations that advocate or perform abortions."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Abortions should always be legal." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding abortion. Other or expanded principles: "MILITARY WOMEN SERVING ABROAD SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO ABORTIONS. MEDICAID SHOULD COVER ABORTIONS."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Abortions should always be legally available." Indicate which principles you support (if any) concerning abortion. Other or expanded principles: "MILITARY WOMEN SERVING ABROAD SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO ABORTIONS. MEDICAID SHOULD COVER ABORTIONS."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Abortions should always be illegal."
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 156. 106th Congress. Overseas Military Abortion Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 06/09/1999. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Calls President Bush Signing of Anti-Choice Legislation A Dangerous Step Towards Taking Away a Woman's Right to Choose. 1 April 2004. "The undisputed aim of this new law [Unborn Victims of Violence Act, H.R. 1997] is to move forward a calculated anti-choice agenda in which embryos and fetuses are codified into law as humans, with all the legal rights and protections afforded people in our society. This would bring us one step closer to overturning Roe v Wade and taking away a woman's Constitutional right to choose." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Statement on the Nomination of Judge John G. Roberts to the Supreme Court. 19 July 2005. "Unfortunately, Judge Roberts' record suggests he would be a justice who would undermine a woman's right to choose, fail to uphold our landmark civil rights decisions, side with big corporations at the expense of workers and the environment, and erode the First Amendment rights of Americans." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Democratic Members of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. 13 September 2011. "By failing to permit the District of Columbia to spend local government funds on abortion, we are sending the message that low-income women should not have access to the same medical services that middle- and upper-income women can access. Ultimately, this prohibition may threaten the health of medically vulnerable women and deny patients the right to access constitutionally protected medical services. We must strive to expand health care services for Americans throughout the nation -- not place barriers in the road of a woman seeking medical care simply because of the state, city, or district that she lives in. The District does not have a vote in the House or Senate. But other Democrats do. We urge you to stand strong and to protect the democratic self-government of the District of Columbia." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "g) Medicare, Medicaid, and federal subsidies should be prohibited from being used on abortion procedures."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "e) Should federal subsidies be prohibited from being used for abortion procedures?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "f) Eliminate public funding for abortions and public funding of organizations that advocate or perform abortions."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "g) Prohibit public funding of abortions and of organizations that advocate or perform abortions."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Abortions should always be legal." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding abortion. Other or expanded principles: "Military women serving abroad should have access to abortions. Medicaid should cover full range of reproductive health services, including abortions."
  • NARAL Pro-Choice America. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. NARAL Pro-Choice America endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2006 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Abortions should always be illegal."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "f) Prohibit public funding of abortions and to organizations that advocate or perform abortions."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Abortions should always be legal." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding abortion. Other or expanded principles: "MILITARY WOMEN SERVING ABROAD SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO ABORTIONS. MEDICAID SHOULD COVER ABORTIONS."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Abortions should always be legally available." Indicate which principles you support (if any) concerning abortion. Other or expanded principles: "MILITARY WOMEN SERVING ABROAD SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO ABORTIONS. MEDICAID SHOULD COVER ABORTIONS."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Abortions should always be illegal."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Democratic Members of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. 13 September 2011. "By failing to permit the District of Columbia to spend local government funds on abortion, we are sending the message that low-income women should not have access to the same medical services that middle- and upper-income women can access. Ultimately, this prohibition may threaten the health of medically vulnerable women and deny patients the right to access constitutionally protected medical services. We must strive to expand health care services for Americans throughout the nation -- not place barriers in the road of a woman seeking medical care simply because of the state, city, or district that she lives in. The District does not have a vote in the House or Senate. But other Democrats do. We urge you to stand strong and to protect the democratic self-government of the District of Columbia." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Statement on the Nomination of Judge John G. Roberts to the Supreme Court. 19 July 2005. "Unfortunately, Judge Roberts' record suggests he would be a justice who would undermine a woman's right to choose, fail to uphold our landmark civil rights decisions, side with big corporations at the expense of workers and the environment, and erode the First Amendment rights of Americans." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Calls President Bush Signing of Anti-Choice Legislation A Dangerous Step Towards Taking Away a Woman's Right to Choose. 1 April 2004. "The undisputed aim of this new law [Unborn Victims of Violence Act, H.R. 1997] is to move forward a calculated anti-choice agenda in which embryos and fetuses are codified into law as humans, with all the legal rights and protections afforded people in our society. This would bring us one step closer to overturning Roe v Wade and taking away a woman's Constitutional right to choose." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. 27 April 2005. "Mr. Chairman, I stand today in strong opposition to H.R. 748, the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. It is a direct attack on a woman's right to choose, it endangers women's health, and it forces young women facing unintended pregnancies to choose between dealing with it on their own or enlisting the help of a trusted adult who could possibly be put in jail as a result." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 95. 112th Congress. Prohibiting Use of Federal Funds For Planned Parenthood. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 02/18/2011. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 722. 106th Congress. Oversea Military Abortions Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 05/18/2000. (votesmart.org)
  • National Women's Political Caucus. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. National Women's Political Caucus endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2006 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. S 403. 110th Congress. Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 09/26/2006. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H AMDT 209. 109th Congress. Overseas Military Facilities Abortion Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 05/25/2005. (votesmart.org)
  • National Organization for Women. 04/18/2012. "On the votes used to calculate its ratings, the National Organization for Women attaches more value to those votes it considers more important. For 2008, the National Organization for Women gave Jan Schakowsky a rating of 100 percent." (votesmart.org)
  • Family Research Council. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Family Research Council 0 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 509. 111th Congress. Prohibiting Federally Funded Abortion Services. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 11/07/2009. (votesmart.org)
  • NARAL Pro-Choice America. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H Amdt 1017. 106th Congress. Abortion Funding Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 07/20/2000. (votesmart.org)
  • Planned Parenthood. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Planned Parenthood endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2010 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • National Women's Political Caucus. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. National Women's Political Caucus endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2012 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • National Right to Life Committee. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 0 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to the Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives. 9 December 2010. "We oppose acceding to Republican demands to extend the Bush tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires for two reasons. First, it is fiscally irresponsible. Adding more than $900 billion to our national debt, as this proposal would do, handcuffs our ability to offer a balanced plan to achieve fiscal stability without a punishing effect on our current commitments, including Social Security and Medicare. Second, it is grossly unfair. This proposal will hurt, not help, the majority of Americans in the middle class and those working hard to get there. Even as Republicans seek to add billions more to our national debt in tax cuts to the wealthy, they oppose extending unemployment benefits to workers and resist COLA increases to seniors [¦] We support extending tax cuts in full to 98 percent of American taxpayers, as the President initially proposed. He should not back down. Nor should we." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Slightly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal tax levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. f) $350,001 and above" Family Income Taxes Other or expanded principles: "E) Maintain at lower end and slightly increase at upper end"
  • Jan Schakowsky. On 10th Anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts, Rep. Schakowsky Calls for New Tax Rates for Millionaires and Billionaires. 7 June 2011. "Republicans in Washington, who squandered a budget surplus and created the huge deficit, are now demanding that the middle class foot the bill...Their solution to our fiscal mess is to gut vital programs like Medicare and cut domestic spending in a way that could cost 700,000 Americans to lose their jobs. At the same time, they not only want to extend the Bush Tax Cuts permanently -- they want additional tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, continued subsidies for Big Oil, and tax breaks for corporations that offshore jobs and profits. Those of us here today -- and groups gathered across the country -- are marking this anniversary by standing up and saying NO." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 1836. 107th Congress. Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, 2001. Jan Schakowsky voted Did Not Vote on 05/16/2001. (votesmart.org)
  • Citizens for Tax Justice. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Citizens for Tax Justice 100 percent in 2006." (votesmart.org)
  • Americans for Tax Reform. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 0 percent in 2007." (votesmart.org)
  • National Taxpayers Union. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported reasonable tax and spending policies as defined by the National Taxpayers Union 5 percent of the time in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. The Fairness in Taxation Act. 30 March 2011. "It's time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share. This isn't about punishment and it isn't about revenge. It is about fairness." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Rep. Schakowsky Votes Against the Republican Budget for FY2012. 15 April 2011. "From 1979 until 2005, the bottom twenty percent of households saw their incomes increase by $200. Over the same period, the top 0.1 percent saw income growth of nearly six million dollars -- each year. There's nothing courageous about a plan that would protect the wealthy, Big Oil, and corporations that ship jobs overseas at the expense of the elderly, the disabled, and children. The Republican budget resolution does not reflect the values of Americans, and I urge my colleagues to reject it." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Republican Budget Proposal. 5 April 2011. "I have a bill that would create new tax brackets for millionaires and billionaires, still lower than those under Ronald Reagan, and would raise $74 billion in 2011. We can bring down the deficit, and we can do it while protecting programs that create jobs and that don't further burden old people, the poor, and middle class Americans." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Introduces Bill to Tax Millionaires and Billionaires. 16 March 2011. ""In the United States today, the richest 1% owns 34 % of our nation's wealth -- that's more than the entire bottom 90%, who own just 29% of the country's wealth...And the top one-hundredth of 1% now makes an average of $27 million per household per year. The average income for the bottom 90% of Americans? $31,244. It's time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share..." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. The Default Crisis and Its Effects on American Jobs. 27 July 2011. "First, we need to create jobs. Putting people back to work will raise revenues and bring down the deficit as a proportion of the economy. Second, we need to eliminate spending we don't need, such as billions of dollars in waste spent by the Pentagon. But we need to protect spending on vital programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. And finally, we need to raise revenues in a fair way." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Video: Thom Hartmann: Taxing millionaires & billionaires? With Rep Jan. 17 March 2011. "I thought I'd go along with the American people who say the best way to deal with our debt and deficit problem would be to ask for the very rich, the millionaires, and I go up to the billionaires, to pay their fair share." (youtu.be)
  • Lynn Sweet. Chicago Sun-Times: Schakowsky proposing higher federal taxes for millionaires, billionaires. 16 March, 2011. "It's time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share, which is why I introduced the Fairness in Taxation Act. This isn't about punishment or revenge. It's about fairness. It's about avoiding budget cuts that harm middle class families and those who aspire to it. We can choose to cut education, job creation and health care, or we can choose to ask those who can contribute more to do so." (blogs.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to the Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives. 9 December 2010. "We oppose acceding to Republican demands to extend the Bush tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires for two reasons. First, it is fiscally irresponsible. Adding more than $900 billion to our national debt, as this proposal would do, handcuffs our ability to offer a balanced plan to achieve fiscal stability without a punishing effect on our current commitments, including Social Security and Medicare. Second, it is grossly unfair. This proposal will hurt, not help, the majority of Americans in the middle class and those working hard to get there. Even as Republicans seek to add billions more to our national debt in tax cuts to the wealthy, they oppose extending unemployment benefits to workers and resist COLA increases to seniors [¦] We support extending tax cuts in full to 98 percent of American taxpayers, as the President initially proposed. He should not back down. Nor should we." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "5) Do you support making President Bush's tax cuts permanent?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "5) Do you support making President Bush's tax cuts permanent?" Budgetary, Spending, and Taxes, Part 3: Taxes (B) Other or expanded principles: "I believe that we need to roll back the Bush tax cuts that benefit the wealthy, close off-shore and other loopholes that allow corporations to evade their fair share of U.S. taxes and provide incentives for offshoring jobs, eliminate costly government contracting and procurement policies, and end the war in Iraq which, under conservative estimates, is costing U.S. taxpayers $11 milllion an hour."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Slightly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal tax levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. f) $350,001 and above" Family Income Taxes Other or expanded principles: "E) Maintain at lower end and slightly increase at upper end"
  • Jan Schakowsky. On 10th Anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts, Rep. Schakowsky Calls for New Tax Rates for Millionaires and Billionaires. 7 June 2011. "Republicans in Washington, who squandered a budget surplus and created the huge deficit, are now demanding that the middle class foot the bill...Their solution to our fiscal mess is to gut vital programs like Medicare and cut domestic spending in a way that could cost 700,000 Americans to lose their jobs. At the same time, they not only want to extend the Bush Tax Cuts permanently -- they want additional tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, continued subsidies for Big Oil, and tax breaks for corporations that offshore jobs and profits. Those of us here today -- and groups gathered across the country -- are marking this anniversary by standing up and saying NO." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 1836. 107th Congress. Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, 2001. Jan Schakowsky voted Did Not Vote on 05/16/2001. (votesmart.org)
  • Citizens for Tax Justice. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Citizens for Tax Justice 100 percent in 2006." (votesmart.org)
  • Americans for Tax Reform. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform 0 percent in 2007." (votesmart.org)
  • National Taxpayers Union. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported reasonable tax and spending policies as defined by the National Taxpayers Union 5 percent of the time in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. The Fairness in Taxation Act. 30 March 2011. "It's time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share. This isn't about punishment and it isn't about revenge. It is about fairness." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Rep. Schakowsky Votes Against the Republican Budget for FY2012. 15 April 2011. "From 1979 until 2005, the bottom twenty percent of households saw their incomes increase by $200. Over the same period, the top 0.1 percent saw income growth of nearly six million dollars -- each year. There's nothing courageous about a plan that would protect the wealthy, Big Oil, and corporations that ship jobs overseas at the expense of the elderly, the disabled, and children. The Republican budget resolution does not reflect the values of Americans, and I urge my colleagues to reject it." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Republican Budget Proposal. 5 April 2011. "I have a bill that would create new tax brackets for millionaires and billionaires, still lower than those under Ronald Reagan, and would raise $74 billion in 2011. We can bring down the deficit, and we can do it while protecting programs that create jobs and that don't further burden old people, the poor, and middle class Americans." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Introduces Bill to Tax Millionaires and Billionaires. 16 March 2011. ""In the United States today, the richest 1% owns 34 % of our nation's wealth -- that's more than the entire bottom 90%, who own just 29% of the country's wealth...And the top one-hundredth of 1% now makes an average of $27 million per household per year. The average income for the bottom 90% of Americans? $31,244. It's time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share..." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. The Default Crisis and Its Effects on American Jobs. 27 July 2011. "First, we need to create jobs. Putting people back to work will raise revenues and bring down the deficit as a proportion of the economy. Second, we need to eliminate spending we don't need, such as billions of dollars in waste spent by the Pentagon. But we need to protect spending on vital programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. And finally, we need to raise revenues in a fair way." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Video: Thom Hartmann: Taxing millionaires & billionaires? With Rep Jan. 17 March 2011. "I thought I'd go along with the American people who say the best way to deal with our debt and deficit problem would be to ask for the very rich, the millionaires, and I go up to the billionaires, to pay their fair share." (youtu.be)
  • Lynn Sweet. Chicago Sun-Times: Schakowsky proposing higher federal taxes for millionaires, billionaires. 16 March, 2011. "It's time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share, which is why I introduced the Fairness in Taxation Act. This isn't about punishment or revenge. It's about fairness. It's about avoiding budget cuts that harm middle class families and those who aspire to it. We can choose to cut education, job creation and health care, or we can choose to ask those who can contribute more to do so." (blogs.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "5) Do you support making President Bush's tax cuts permanent?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "5) Do you support making President Bush's tax cuts permanent?" Budgetary, Spending, and Taxes, Part 3: Taxes (B) Other or expanded principles: "I believe that we need to roll back the Bush tax cuts that benefit the wealthy, close off-shore and other loopholes that allow corporations to evade their fair share of U.S. taxes and provide incentives for offshoring jobs, eliminate costly government contracting and procurement policies, and end the war in Iraq which, under conservative estimates, is costing U.S. taxpayers $11 milllion an hour."

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 1424. 110th Congress. Financial Asset Purchase Authority and Tax Law Amendments. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 10/03/2008. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "5) Do you support using government funds in an effort to stimulate and improve the economy?" Budget, Spending, and Tax Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question 4): I support responsible ways to reduce the deficit. "
  • Americans for Prosperity. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Americans for Prosperity 0 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • The Club for Growth. 04/18/2012. "On the votes used to calculate its ratings, The Club for Growth attaches more value to those votes it considers more important. For 2010, The Club for Growth gave Jan Schakowsky a rating of 0 percent." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 5297. 112th Congress. Small Business Lending Fund and Tax Law Amendments. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 09/23/2010. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "Despite some positive economic signs, millions of Americans still can't find work. With state budgets stretched thin and consumer confidence low, the federal government has an important role to play in job creation and economic growth." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Fox News "Your World with Cavuto" - Transcript. 3 November 2011. "CAVUTO: Do the math backwards, Congresswoman? Do the math backwards, that if you talk about, let's say the two million jobs they are arguing were gained through stimulus, you cannot say, if you took that out, the unemployment rate would have been 15 percent without it. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, that is exactly what -- that is exactly what they calculated using all kinds of economic models and saying that if we hadn't put those people to work through the stimulus program and other government programs that, in fact, that would be it. I am not an economist, you are right. And so I rely on these economists, almost all of whom, I think just about all of whom, who have said, yes, indeed, the stimulus program did just that. It created jobs and helped to stimulate the economy." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Issue Position: Economy & Jobs. 8 November 2011. "In early 2009, I voted for and Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, ARRA. Enacted in the first month of President Obama's term, the measure was an effort to jumpstart our economy, create and save 3.5 million jobs, give a tax cut to small business and 95% of American workers, begin to rebuild America's road, rail, and water infrastructure, and make a historic commitment to education, clean energy, and science and technology, with unprecedented accountability. A recent study by economists Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi, the former advisor to Presidential candidate, Senator John McCain, found that without congressional action -- including the ARRA - during the economic crisis, the GDP in 2010 would be about 11.5% lower and there would be about 8½ million fewer jobs." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Job Creation and Unemployment Relief Act of 2008 “ (Extensions of Remarks). 26 September 2008. "In February, I was pleased to vote in favor of the first economic stimulus package when it passed the House. However, I was disappointed that, because of Republican opposition and the need to move the bill quickly, it did not include increases in unemployment benefits, Food Stamps, Medicaid payments to States, Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program benefits, or infrastructure investments, all of which would have a significant stimulative effect on our economy. As a result, a number of studies have concluded that the stimulus package only had a negligible effect on our economy." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Jobs. 2 November 2011. "I wanted to just debunk a myth that is so persistent and that some of our colleagues on the Republican side want to repeat over and over again, and that is that the stimulus bill did nothing, created no jobs. And of course that's just not true. No matter how many times they say it, it is not true. Between 1.9 million and 3 million jobs were created or saved. But I also know it's not true because many of those same people, when the ribbons get cut on those projects, actually appear at the ribbon cuttings. As we speak right now, there are people who are collecting those photos and videos and news accounts of those people who say the stimulus program created no jobs so that we can compile those kind of things and show the hypocrisy that you have when the project opens, there they are, smiling and cutting the ribbon, because it's not true. It did create jobs." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. MSNBC "The Ed Show" - Transcript. 20 November 2009. "I think we need to make major, major investments. We don‘t have to think about them as, you know, cost to the - the government. We need to make the investments. We need to pass another transportation package that we‘re looking at in the - in the House of Representatives, get people to work in the new construction season that‘s - that‘s coming up." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Backs Bipartisan Economic Stimulus Plan. 30 January 2008. "Today's bill [Recovery Rebates and Economic Stimulus for the American People Act of 2008, H.R. 5140] will help jumpstart our sluggish economy by putting money back in the pockets of hardworking Americans who will go out and spend the money...While this bill is a positive first step, we should also extend unemployment insurance, food stamps, low-income heating energy assistance, Medicaid and expand the tax rebate to people on social security. I hope that we can address these issues during the House and Senate conference committee negotiations. We need to make sure that this economic relief reaches the families who need it the most." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Statement on Voting for the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010. 17 December 2010. "And not only does unemployment insurance help individual and families who are struggling to pay bills and hold onto their homes, it injects another jolt of stimulus into our economy because the folks who receive this money go straight out and they spend it. Providing unemployment insurance the right thing to do, but it is also the smart thing to do for our economic recovery. At the end of the day -- and a long, heated debate -- I chose to support our struggling middle class." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Statement of U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky. 19 April 2004. "If we want to get the economy moving again, we need to put money in the hands of people who need it and who will spend it. We know that for every dollar spent on unemployment benefits, we get back a $1.72 in economic stimulus. So if Congress extends unemployment benefits, we will experience a stimulus to the local economy of up to $403 million." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. The Close of an Extremely Productive 111th Congress. 13 January 2011. "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was enacted in the first month of President Obama's term to jumpstart our economy. Since then, the ARRA investments have created or saved 3.5 million jobs, and ARRA provided a tax cut to small business and 95% of all Americans. This stimulus spending has also begun to rebuild America's road, rail, and water infrastructure, and has made an historic commitment to education, clean energy, and science and technology, with unprecedented accountability. In August, I traveled throughout the district on a small business listening tour to better understand the challenges still facing our small business community and to provide information on available programs that can help." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "5) Do you support using government funds in an effort to stimulate and improve the economy?" Budget, Spending, and Tax Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question 4): I support responsible ways to reduce the deficit. "
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 1424. 110th Congress. Financial Asset Purchase Authority and Tax Law Amendments. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 10/03/2008. (votesmart.org)
  • Americans for Prosperity. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Americans for Prosperity 0 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • The Club for Growth. 04/18/2012. "On the votes used to calculate its ratings, The Club for Growth attaches more value to those votes it considers more important. For 2010, The Club for Growth gave Jan Schakowsky a rating of 0 percent." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 5297. 112th Congress. Small Business Lending Fund and Tax Law Amendments. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 09/23/2010. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "Despite some positive economic signs, millions of Americans still can't find work. With state budgets stretched thin and consumer confidence low, the federal government has an important role to play in job creation and economic growth." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Fox News "Your World with Cavuto" - Transcript. 3 November 2011. "CAVUTO: Do the math backwards, Congresswoman? Do the math backwards, that if you talk about, let's say the two million jobs they are arguing were gained through stimulus, you cannot say, if you took that out, the unemployment rate would have been 15 percent without it. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, that is exactly what -- that is exactly what they calculated using all kinds of economic models and saying that if we hadn't put those people to work through the stimulus program and other government programs that, in fact, that would be it. I am not an economist, you are right. And so I rely on these economists, almost all of whom, I think just about all of whom, who have said, yes, indeed, the stimulus program did just that. It created jobs and helped to stimulate the economy." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Issue Position: Economy & Jobs. 8 November 2011. "In early 2009, I voted for and Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, ARRA. Enacted in the first month of President Obama's term, the measure was an effort to jumpstart our economy, create and save 3.5 million jobs, give a tax cut to small business and 95% of American workers, begin to rebuild America's road, rail, and water infrastructure, and make a historic commitment to education, clean energy, and science and technology, with unprecedented accountability. A recent study by economists Alan Blinder and Mark Zandi, the former advisor to Presidential candidate, Senator John McCain, found that without congressional action -- including the ARRA - during the economic crisis, the GDP in 2010 would be about 11.5% lower and there would be about 8½ million fewer jobs." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Job Creation and Unemployment Relief Act of 2008 “ (Extensions of Remarks). 26 September 2008. "In February, I was pleased to vote in favor of the first economic stimulus package when it passed the House. However, I was disappointed that, because of Republican opposition and the need to move the bill quickly, it did not include increases in unemployment benefits, Food Stamps, Medicaid payments to States, Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program benefits, or infrastructure investments, all of which would have a significant stimulative effect on our economy. As a result, a number of studies have concluded that the stimulus package only had a negligible effect on our economy." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Jobs. 2 November 2011. "I wanted to just debunk a myth that is so persistent and that some of our colleagues on the Republican side want to repeat over and over again, and that is that the stimulus bill did nothing, created no jobs. And of course that's just not true. No matter how many times they say it, it is not true. Between 1.9 million and 3 million jobs were created or saved. But I also know it's not true because many of those same people, when the ribbons get cut on those projects, actually appear at the ribbon cuttings. As we speak right now, there are people who are collecting those photos and videos and news accounts of those people who say the stimulus program created no jobs so that we can compile those kind of things and show the hypocrisy that you have when the project opens, there they are, smiling and cutting the ribbon, because it's not true. It did create jobs." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. MSNBC "The Ed Show" - Transcript. 20 November 2009. "I think we need to make major, major investments. We don‘t have to think about them as, you know, cost to the - the government. We need to make the investments. We need to pass another transportation package that we‘re looking at in the - in the House of Representatives, get people to work in the new construction season that‘s - that‘s coming up." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Backs Bipartisan Economic Stimulus Plan. 30 January 2008. "Today's bill [Recovery Rebates and Economic Stimulus for the American People Act of 2008, H.R. 5140] will help jumpstart our sluggish economy by putting money back in the pockets of hardworking Americans who will go out and spend the money...While this bill is a positive first step, we should also extend unemployment insurance, food stamps, low-income heating energy assistance, Medicaid and expand the tax rebate to people on social security. I hope that we can address these issues during the House and Senate conference committee negotiations. We need to make sure that this economic relief reaches the families who need it the most." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Statement on Voting for the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010. 17 December 2010. "And not only does unemployment insurance help individual and families who are struggling to pay bills and hold onto their homes, it injects another jolt of stimulus into our economy because the folks who receive this money go straight out and they spend it. Providing unemployment insurance the right thing to do, but it is also the smart thing to do for our economic recovery. At the end of the day -- and a long, heated debate -- I chose to support our struggling middle class." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Statement of U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky. 19 April 2004. "If we want to get the economy moving again, we need to put money in the hands of people who need it and who will spend it. We know that for every dollar spent on unemployment benefits, we get back a $1.72 in economic stimulus. So if Congress extends unemployment benefits, we will experience a stimulus to the local economy of up to $403 million." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. The Close of an Extremely Productive 111th Congress. 13 January 2011. "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was enacted in the first month of President Obama's term to jumpstart our economy. Since then, the ARRA investments have created or saved 3.5 million jobs, and ARRA provided a tax cut to small business and 95% of all Americans. This stimulus spending has also begun to rebuild America's road, rail, and water infrastructure, and has made an historic commitment to education, clean energy, and science and technology, with unprecedented accountability. In August, I traveled throughout the district on a small business listening tour to better understand the challenges still facing our small business community and to provide information on available programs that can help." (votesmart.org)

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards and testing of public school students." Indicate which principles you support (if any) concerning education. Other or expanded principles: "I SUPPORT INITIATIVES TO IMPROVE TEACHER QUALITY, INCLUDING TESTING, BUT NOT MERIT PAY."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "b) Do you support federal funding for universal pre-K programs?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "d) Education" Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. Other or expanded principles: "Regarding sections a) Agriculture, c) Defense, and g) International aid: I support increases in some areas and cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards for and testing of public school students."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. d) Education" Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. Other or expanded principles: "Regarding sections a) Agriculture, c) Defense, and g) International aid: I support increases in some areas and cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "k) Eliminate all federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind)."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. d) Education" 1) Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "A), C), H), I), and J) - These are broad categories - I support increases in some areas, cuts in others"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Using the key, indicate what federal funding levels you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. [?] d) Education" Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "a, c, g, h--These categories are too broad. I support increases in some areas & cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Providing education is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Using the key, indicate what federal funding levels you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category. d) Education" Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "(Agriculture, Defense, International aid, Law enforcement) THESE CATEGORIES ARE TOO BROAD. I SUPPORT INCREASES IN SOME AREAS & CUTS IN OTHERS."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "d) Do you support federal funding for K-12 school vouchers?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "a) Do you support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "i) Eliminate restrictions on federal education funding, giving educators or local school districts more flexibility to design and implement their programs."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind)."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards for and testing of public school students."
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2300. 106th Congress. Academic Achievement for All Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 10/21/1999. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "The Race to the Top competition has created an incentive for school districts and local organizations to partner with one another to implement new ideas. A number of people have raised serious questions about certain aspects of the President's agenda for education, such as the move towards charter schools or the use of competitive grants. That said, the Race to the Top program has jumpstarted the national conversation about how to make education work better for this country's children and has already begun to implement real change [¦] varying standards make identifying and implementing innovative education programs on a large scale extremely difficult, and I applaud recent state efforts largely undertaken because of Race to the Top to adopt national standards." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support the federal government funding universal pre-K programs." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding education. Other or expanded principles: "I support federal standards, but believe NCLB needs to be significantly overhauled"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2012 Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected NO ANSWER for: "a) Do you support requiring states to implement education reforms in order to be eligible for competitive federal grants?;" Other or expanded principles: "I support strong standards for our educational system but believe that No Child Left Behind needs to be substantially overhauled, and that teachers must play a significant role in any education reform we do."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support the federal government funding universal pre-K programs." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding education. Other or expanded principles: "I support federal standards, but believe NCLB needs to be significantly overhauled"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "b) Do you support federal funding for universal pre-K programs?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "d) Education" Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. Other or expanded principles: "Regarding sections a) Agriculture, c) Defense, and g) International aid: I support increases in some areas and cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards for and testing of public school students."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. d) Education" Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. Other or expanded principles: "Regarding sections a) Agriculture, c) Defense, and g) International aid: I support increases in some areas and cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "k) Eliminate all federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind)."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. d) Education" 1) Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "A), C), H), I), and J) - These are broad categories - I support increases in some areas, cuts in others"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Using the key, indicate what federal funding levels you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. [?] d) Education" Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "a, c, g, h--These categories are too broad. I support increases in some areas & cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Providing education is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Using the key, indicate what federal funding levels you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category. d) Education" Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "(Agriculture, Defense, International aid, Law enforcement) THESE CATEGORIES ARE TOO BROAD. I SUPPORT INCREASES IN SOME AREAS & CUTS IN OTHERS."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "d) Do you support federal funding for K-12 school vouchers?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards and testing of public school students." Indicate which principles you support (if any) concerning education. Other or expanded principles: "I SUPPORT INITIATIVES TO IMPROVE TEACHER QUALITY, INCLUDING TESTING, BUT NOT MERIT PAY."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "a) Do you support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "i) Eliminate restrictions on federal education funding, giving educators or local school districts more flexibility to design and implement their programs."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind)."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards for and testing of public school students."
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2300. 106th Congress. Academic Achievement for All Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 10/21/1999. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "The Race to the Top competition has created an incentive for school districts and local organizations to partner with one another to implement new ideas. A number of people have raised serious questions about certain aspects of the President's agenda for education, such as the move towards charter schools or the use of competitive grants. That said, the Race to the Top program has jumpstarted the national conversation about how to make education work better for this country's children and has already begun to implement real change [¦] varying standards make identifying and implementing innovative education programs on a large scale extremely difficult, and I applaud recent state efforts largely undertaken because of Race to the Top to adopt national standards." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2012 Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected NO ANSWER for: "a) Do you support requiring states to implement education reforms in order to be eligible for competitive federal grants?;" Other or expanded principles: "I support strong standards for our educational system but believe that No Child Left Behind needs to be substantially overhauled, and that teachers must play a significant role in any education reform we do."

Vote Smart's Research

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "h) Strengthen emission controls and fuel efficiency standards on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "m) Support the Kyoto Protocol to limit global warming."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "c) Support Clear Skies Act to reduce power plant emissions by setting a national cap on pollutants."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "k) Allow energy producers to trade pollution credits."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Strengthen emission controls on all gasoline or diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "l) Allow energy producers to trade pollution credits."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Applauds CAFE Standard Reform. 19 May 2009. "I applaud the President's decision to speed up the timetable to reduce auto emissions and increase efficiency standards. It will bring us closer to the important goals of energy independence and a clean environment. The technologies that will be developed will create jobs in research and development, manufacturing, and sales." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "In order to address this crisis, the United States must adopt an aggressive program in order to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Earth Day. 24 April 2006. "States and cities are stepping up to act where the Bush Administration has not, establishing cap and trade programs, working towards carbon neutrality, and investing in renewable energy sources. We all share an obligation to promote conservation and to reduce our environmental footprint." (votesmart.org)
  • Sierra Club. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Sierra Club endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2002 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Sierra Club. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Sierra Club endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2004 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 910. 112th Congress. Energy Tax Prevention Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 04/07/2011. (votesmart.org)
  • League of Conservation Voters. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Sierra Club. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Sierra Club endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2010 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Environment America. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of Environment America 100 percent in 2009." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2454. 111th Congress. Energy and Environmental Law Amendments ("Cap and Trade"). Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 06/26/2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Rep. Schakowsky recognizes Earth Day and the Need to Protect the Great Lakes from Climate Change. 22 April 2011. "Earlier this year, the Obama Administration took an important step forward when it announced that, for the first time, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. While this regulation is still being finalized, it will save thousands of lives while also ensuring that our nation's greatest natural treasures like the Great Lakes are preserved. This is one of many initiatives such as the creation of American jobs in green energy production that are being undertaken to improve the environment, public health and the economy." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Votes for Historic Energy Bill. 6 December 2007. "For the first time in over 30 years, the House of Representatives will pass a significant energy bill one that reduces our dependence on foreign oil. Our addiction to oil has compromised our national security and causes tremendous damage to our environment...The bill overall will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 35 percent of what is needed by 2030 to save the planet." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Votes to Protect Environment, Reduce Global Warming. 27 June 2007. "The legislation [FY08 Interior-Environment Appropriations, H.R. 2643] also makes climate change research a key priority, boosting federal investment in climate change research at Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Interior Department by 53 percent. Additionally, the bill responds to the Supreme Court's landmark decision in April by compelling the Environmental Protection Agency to begin developing a process for regulating greenhouse gases." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to the Honorable Lisa Jackson, EPA. 23 September 2011. "We are writing to express our support for the Environmental Protection Agency's final Cross-State Air Pollution Control Rule. This important public health standard will prevent approximately 34,000 premature deaths, more than 15,000 heart attacks, 19,000 cases of acute bronchitis, 4000,000 cases of aggravated asthma, and 1,8 million lost workdays annually. The aggregate health benefits will save up to $280 billion annually in avoided costs, at only a cost of only $800 million. This 350-1 benefit to cost ratio represents a great deal for the public and an opportunity to improve the quality of life and competitiveness of American metropolitan areas. In concert with other improvements to state and federal regulations, it will reduce sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide by 73% and 54%, respectively, by 2014." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "b) Do you support international emissions targets aimed at reducing the effects of climate change?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "l) Support the U.S. re-entering the Kyoto treaty process to limit global warming."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "c) Do you support allowing energy producers to trade carbon credits under a "cap and trade" system?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "d) Strengthen emission controls on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Strengthen emission controls and fuel efficiency standards on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "d) Do you support strengthening fuel efficiency standards on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Allow energy producers to trade pollution credits under "cap and trade" laws."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Do you support enacting environmental regulations aimed at reducing the effects of climate change?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "d) Support the U.S. re-entering the current Kyoto treaty process to limit global warming."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "h) Strengthen emission controls and fuel efficiency standards on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "m) Support the Kyoto Protocol to limit global warming."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "c) Support Clear Skies Act to reduce power plant emissions by setting a national cap on pollutants."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "k) Allow energy producers to trade pollution credits."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Strengthen emission controls on all gasoline or diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "l) Allow energy producers to trade pollution credits."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Applauds CAFE Standard Reform. 19 May 2009. "I applaud the President's decision to speed up the timetable to reduce auto emissions and increase efficiency standards. It will bring us closer to the important goals of energy independence and a clean environment. The technologies that will be developed will create jobs in research and development, manufacturing, and sales." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "In order to address this crisis, the United States must adopt an aggressive program in order to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Earth Day. 24 April 2006. "States and cities are stepping up to act where the Bush Administration has not, establishing cap and trade programs, working towards carbon neutrality, and investing in renewable energy sources. We all share an obligation to promote conservation and to reduce our environmental footprint." (votesmart.org)
  • Sierra Club. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Sierra Club endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2002 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Sierra Club. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Sierra Club endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2004 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 910. 112th Congress. Energy Tax Prevention Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 04/07/2011. (votesmart.org)
  • League of Conservation Voters. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Sierra Club. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Sierra Club endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2010 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Environment America. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of Environment America 100 percent in 2009." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2454. 111th Congress. Energy and Environmental Law Amendments ("Cap and Trade"). Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 06/26/2009. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Rep. Schakowsky recognizes Earth Day and the Need to Protect the Great Lakes from Climate Change. 22 April 2011. "Earlier this year, the Obama Administration took an important step forward when it announced that, for the first time, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. While this regulation is still being finalized, it will save thousands of lives while also ensuring that our nation's greatest natural treasures like the Great Lakes are preserved. This is one of many initiatives such as the creation of American jobs in green energy production that are being undertaken to improve the environment, public health and the economy." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Votes for Historic Energy Bill. 6 December 2007. "For the first time in over 30 years, the House of Representatives will pass a significant energy bill one that reduces our dependence on foreign oil. Our addiction to oil has compromised our national security and causes tremendous damage to our environment...The bill overall will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 35 percent of what is needed by 2030 to save the planet." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Votes to Protect Environment, Reduce Global Warming. 27 June 2007. "The legislation [FY08 Interior-Environment Appropriations, H.R. 2643] also makes climate change research a key priority, boosting federal investment in climate change research at Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Interior Department by 53 percent. Additionally, the bill responds to the Supreme Court's landmark decision in April by compelling the Environmental Protection Agency to begin developing a process for regulating greenhouse gases." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to the Honorable Lisa Jackson, EPA. 23 September 2011. "We are writing to express our support for the Environmental Protection Agency's final Cross-State Air Pollution Control Rule. This important public health standard will prevent approximately 34,000 premature deaths, more than 15,000 heart attacks, 19,000 cases of acute bronchitis, 4000,000 cases of aggravated asthma, and 1,8 million lost workdays annually. The aggregate health benefits will save up to $280 billion annually in avoided costs, at only a cost of only $800 million. This 350-1 benefit to cost ratio represents a great deal for the public and an opportunity to improve the quality of life and competitiveness of American metropolitan areas. In concert with other improvements to state and federal regulations, it will reduce sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide by 73% and 54%, respectively, by 2014." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "b) Do you support international emissions targets aimed at reducing the effects of climate change?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "l) Support the U.S. re-entering the Kyoto treaty process to limit global warming."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "c) Do you support allowing energy producers to trade carbon credits under a "cap and trade" system?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "d) Strengthen emission controls on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Strengthen emission controls and fuel efficiency standards on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "d) Do you support strengthening fuel efficiency standards on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Allow energy producers to trade pollution credits under "cap and trade" laws."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Do you support enacting environmental regulations aimed at reducing the effects of climate change?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "d) Support the U.S. re-entering the current Kyoto treaty process to limit global warming."

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "h) Require a license for gun possession."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Warns “ Time is Running Out on Extending Assault Weapons Ban. 19 July 2004. "If we allow this ban to expire, then every day after that more police officers and innocent families will be in the sights of criminals wielding Uzis and Tec-9s and AK-47s - guns that have no purpose other than to kill people. Every day that we allow to pass without an assault weapons ban is a day that the President and the Republican leadership in this country are disregarding the safety of the American people. So I say to Speaker Hastert, we've been waiting for too long - it's time to renew the assault weapons ban, now!" (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. 28 October 2005. "Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 397, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. I believe this bill unfairly grants the gun industry immunity and takes away an individual's or state's ability to hold gun manufacturers, gun dealers, and gun trade associations accountable for negligence and product liability standards that apply to other industries. The bill perpetuates the gun industry's disregard for public safety and holds up their ``see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil'' approach to gun manufacturing and distribution." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Common-Sense Gun Legislation is Needed Now. 25 April 2007. "Madam Speaker, I rise today to extend my condolences to the families of the 32 Virginia Tech students and teachers who lost their lives due to senseless gun violence on April 16, 2007. I would also like the families of Columbine High School tragedy--which occurred 8 years ago on April 20th--to know that my thoughts and prayers are with them as well. As those two tragedies demonstrate, we are not doing enough to protect our schools, workplaces, homes, and communities from gun violence. In honor of all the victims of gun violence, I call on my colleagues to pass tougher gun laws, including requiring more stringent background checks and banning the use of assault weapons and high-ammunition clips." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Women's Voices for Change: The Wednesday Five: Women Reporters, Lawmakers Against Illegal Guns, and a Great Date-Night Flick. 23 February 2011. "Women are more likely to support gun control measures than are men because they are less likely than are men to own guns, [and they] also realize the significant role guns play in not only mass shootings but also domestic violence, workplace killings and suicides." (womensvoicesforchange.org)
  • Marija Mills. Chicago Tribune: Schakowsky Hosts Forum on Gun Safety Laws. 26 July 1999. "The women in the House, particularly the Democratic women, are taking the lead on the effort to pass gun safety legislation." (articles.chicagotribune.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2122. 106th Congress. Mandatory Gun Show Background Check Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 06/18/1999. (votesmart.org)
  • Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 100 percent from 1988-2003 (Senate) or 1991-2003 (House)." (votesmart.org)
  • Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2008 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2010 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. S 397. 109th Congress. Firearms Manufacturers Protection Bill. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 10/20/2005. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H AMDT 1156. 110th Congress. Trigger Lock Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 06/28/2006. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 6842. 110th Congress. Repealing Portions of the D.C. Firearm Ban. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 09/17/2008. (votesmart.org)
  • Gun Owners of America. 04/18/2012. "In 2010 Gun Owners of America gave Jan Schakowsky a grade of 9." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. U.S. Representatives Convene Chicago Forum on Gun Show Loophole. 19 August 2010. "Gun shows are notorious for their lack of regulation and are often the place where violent criminals obtain the firearms used to murder innocent people...Unlicensed sellers turn a hefty profit at gun shows without having to check buyers' identification or keep records of their sales, and they have no way of running background checks. This lack of gun show regulation has proved to be deadly time and again. It's totally outrageous that such safety checks are required of licensed firearms sellers while the unlicensed sellers get a free pass, which too often results in homicide. I have long been a proponent of ending the scourge of gun violence that is of epidemic proportions in the Chicago area. Closing the gun show loophole is a key part of that effort." (votesmart.org)
  • Frank Medina. Skokie Patch: Schakowsky is Special House Guest. 26 October 2010. "What the heck do Americans need with assault weapons?...These are guns used in battles not in neighborhoods. People don't need those." (skokie.patch.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "On (c) and (d), indicate what levels (#1-6) you support for the following categories. c) Enforcement of existing restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Reauthorize the ban on the sale or transfer of semi-automatic guns, except those used for hunting."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Ban the sale, ownership or possession of handguns except by law enforcement and other government officials."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "c) Ease federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "d) Do you support a ban on assault rifles?" Gun Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): I believe that individuals have the right to own guns under common-sense restrictions, including bans on AK-47s."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Require background checks on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Renew the ban on the sale or transfer of semi-automatic guns, except those used for hunting."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "c) Do you support allowing individuals to carry concealed guns?" Gun Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): I believe that individuals have the right to own guns under common-sense restrictions, including bans on AK-47s."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Maintain and strengthen the current level of enforcement of existing federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "f) Require background checks on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "c) Ease federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "d) Repeal federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Maintain and strengthen the current level of enforcement of existing federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Allow citizens to carry concealed guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Allow citizens to carry concealed guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Allow citizens to carry concealed guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Require a license for gun possession."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "h) Require a license for gun possession."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Maintain and strengthen the enforcement of existing federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "c) Ease federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "d) Repeal federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Allow individuals to carry concealed guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Slightly Increase" for: "On (c) and (d), indicate what levels (#1-6) you support for the following categories. d) Restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "i) Raise the minimum age for ownership of handguns from 18 to 21."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "h) Require a license for gun possession."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Ban the sale or transfer of semi-automatic guns, except those used for hunting."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Require background checks on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "d) Repeal federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Do you support restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns?" Gun Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): I believe that individuals have the right to own guns under common-sense restrictions, including bans on AK-47s."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Warns “ Time is Running Out on Extending Assault Weapons Ban. 19 July 2004. "If we allow this ban to expire, then every day after that more police officers and innocent families will be in the sights of criminals wielding Uzis and Tec-9s and AK-47s - guns that have no purpose other than to kill people. Every day that we allow to pass without an assault weapons ban is a day that the President and the Republican leadership in this country are disregarding the safety of the American people. So I say to Speaker Hastert, we've been waiting for too long - it's time to renew the assault weapons ban, now!" (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. 28 October 2005. "Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 397, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. I believe this bill unfairly grants the gun industry immunity and takes away an individual's or state's ability to hold gun manufacturers, gun dealers, and gun trade associations accountable for negligence and product liability standards that apply to other industries. The bill perpetuates the gun industry's disregard for public safety and holds up their ``see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil'' approach to gun manufacturing and distribution." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Common-Sense Gun Legislation is Needed Now. 25 April 2007. "Madam Speaker, I rise today to extend my condolences to the families of the 32 Virginia Tech students and teachers who lost their lives due to senseless gun violence on April 16, 2007. I would also like the families of Columbine High School tragedy--which occurred 8 years ago on April 20th--to know that my thoughts and prayers are with them as well. As those two tragedies demonstrate, we are not doing enough to protect our schools, workplaces, homes, and communities from gun violence. In honor of all the victims of gun violence, I call on my colleagues to pass tougher gun laws, including requiring more stringent background checks and banning the use of assault weapons and high-ammunition clips." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Women's Voices for Change: The Wednesday Five: Women Reporters, Lawmakers Against Illegal Guns, and a Great Date-Night Flick. 23 February 2011. "Women are more likely to support gun control measures than are men because they are less likely than are men to own guns, [and they] also realize the significant role guns play in not only mass shootings but also domestic violence, workplace killings and suicides." (womensvoicesforchange.org)
  • Marija Mills. Chicago Tribune: Schakowsky Hosts Forum on Gun Safety Laws. 26 July 1999. "The women in the House, particularly the Democratic women, are taking the lead on the effort to pass gun safety legislation." (articles.chicagotribune.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2122. 106th Congress. Mandatory Gun Show Background Check Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 06/18/1999. (votesmart.org)
  • Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 100 percent from 1988-2003 (Senate) or 1991-2003 (House)." (votesmart.org)
  • Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2008 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Project Vote Smart: Interest Group Endorsements. 04/18/2012. Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence endorsed Jan Schakowsky in the 2010 general election. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. S 397. 109th Congress. Firearms Manufacturers Protection Bill. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 10/20/2005. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H AMDT 1156. 110th Congress. Trigger Lock Amendment. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 06/28/2006. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 6842. 110th Congress. Repealing Portions of the D.C. Firearm Ban. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 09/17/2008. (votesmart.org)
  • Gun Owners of America. 04/18/2012. "In 2010 Gun Owners of America gave Jan Schakowsky a grade of 9." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. U.S. Representatives Convene Chicago Forum on Gun Show Loophole. 19 August 2010. "Gun shows are notorious for their lack of regulation and are often the place where violent criminals obtain the firearms used to murder innocent people...Unlicensed sellers turn a hefty profit at gun shows without having to check buyers' identification or keep records of their sales, and they have no way of running background checks. This lack of gun show regulation has proved to be deadly time and again. It's totally outrageous that such safety checks are required of licensed firearms sellers while the unlicensed sellers get a free pass, which too often results in homicide. I have long been a proponent of ending the scourge of gun violence that is of epidemic proportions in the Chicago area. Closing the gun show loophole is a key part of that effort." (votesmart.org)
  • Frank Medina. Skokie Patch: Schakowsky is Special House Guest. 26 October 2010. "What the heck do Americans need with assault weapons?...These are guns used in battles not in neighborhoods. People don't need those." (skokie.patch.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "On (c) and (d), indicate what levels (#1-6) you support for the following categories. c) Enforcement of existing restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Reauthorize the ban on the sale or transfer of semi-automatic guns, except those used for hunting."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Ban the sale, ownership or possession of handguns except by law enforcement and other government officials."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "c) Ease federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "d) Do you support a ban on assault rifles?" Gun Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): I believe that individuals have the right to own guns under common-sense restrictions, including bans on AK-47s."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Require background checks on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Renew the ban on the sale or transfer of semi-automatic guns, except those used for hunting."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "c) Do you support allowing individuals to carry concealed guns?" Gun Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): I believe that individuals have the right to own guns under common-sense restrictions, including bans on AK-47s."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Maintain and strengthen the current level of enforcement of existing federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "f) Require background checks on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "c) Ease federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "d) Repeal federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Maintain and strengthen the current level of enforcement of existing federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Allow citizens to carry concealed guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Allow citizens to carry concealed guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Allow citizens to carry concealed guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Require a license for gun possession."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Maintain and strengthen the enforcement of existing federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "c) Ease federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "d) Repeal federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Allow individuals to carry concealed guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Slightly Increase" for: "On (c) and (d), indicate what levels (#1-6) you support for the following categories. d) Restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "i) Raise the minimum age for ownership of handguns from 18 to 21."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "h) Require a license for gun possession."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Ban the sale or transfer of semi-automatic guns, except those used for hunting."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Require background checks on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "d) Repeal federal restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Do you support restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns?" Gun Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): I believe that individuals have the right to own guns under common-sense restrictions, including bans on AK-47s."

Vote Smart's Research

  • American Public Health Association. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the American Public Health Association 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2. 112th Congress. Repealing the Health Care Bill. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 01/19/2011. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Rejecting Repeal of Affordable Care Act. 6 January 2011. "We must reject the Republican call for repeal of the Affordable Care Act." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011. "I would like to say to the Republicans, be careful what you wish for. Your star is fading on this effort to repeal, to defund the Affordable Care Act. Only about 18 percent of Americans now are for full repeal of this bill. And are you the ones that are going to go and tell the American people that insurance companies can drop you when you get sick? Children with preexisting conditions? Well, they can be denied coverage. You go and explain that insurance companies can impose devastating annual and lifetime caps, and that pregnant women and breast cancer survivors can be denied coverage, and that being a woman will continue to be a preexisting condition. That's your mission if you were to succeed. In passing this legislation, the American people finally said, this Congress said, that health care is a right, that it should not impoverish individuals." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "The enactment of the Affordable Care Act is an historic accomplishment, expanding health coverage to over 30 million Americans while improving health care affordability and quality for everyone. At the same time, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects it will decrease the federal deficit by $143 billion through 2019. Included in the new law are many initiatives to improve how we deliver health care services, so that we reward quality--not merely quantity--and promote wellness and prevention to keep people healthy and avoid preventable and costly diseases. Those health promotion efforts will also lower costs beyond the savings that CBO estimated." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Issue Position: Senior Citizens. 10 November 2011. "I am pleased that the Affordable Care Act provides even more tools to fight waste, fraud and abuse." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Rep. Schakowsky Statement on the Anniversary of The Patient's Bill of Rights. 23 September 2011. "The Patients' Bill of Rights -- part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act -- is already working. We must act to ensure that we build on the successes of the last year by letting implementation move forward." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Repealing Prevention and Public Health Fund. 13 April 2011. "Here they go again. The Republicans failed in their efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and now they are reversing course and trying to cripple implementation by attacking individual provisions of the law...I want to be very clear, and you've heard it yourselves. This is simply another attempt by Republicans to defund the Affordable Care Act and stop its implementation. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill to repeal the Prevention and Public Health Fund." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Providing health care is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Providing health care is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Implement a universal health care program to guarantee coverage to all Americans regardless of income." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health care. Other or expanded principles: "I support increased funding for medical research, mental health parity & initiatives to eliminate health care disparities. I support a Medicare for all approach but in the interim support tax credits if used for comprehensive affordable coverage."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "g) Providing healthcare is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Implement a universal health care program to guarantee coverage to all Americans regardless of income." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health care. Other or expanded principles: "i) I SUPPORT A MEDICARE FOR ALL APPROACH BUT COULD SUPPORT SOME INCREASED TAX CREDITS DEPENDING ON AFFORABILITY/COMPREHENSIVENESS OF COVERAGE. I SUPPORT MENTAL HEALTH PARITY & EFFORTS TO ELIMINATE RACIAL/ETHNIC DISPARITIES."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Do you support a publicly-administered health insurance option?" Health Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): Only in the absence of single-payer and with rigorous consumer protection standards. Regarding question e): Allow this only with safety protections."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "b) Do you support expanding access to health care through commercial health insurance reform?" Health Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): Only in the absence of single-payer and with rigorous consumer protection standards. Regarding question e): Allow this only with safety protections."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Implement a universal healthcare program to guarantee coverage to all Americans, regardless of income." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health. Other or expanded principles: "C) With safety protections"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Implement a universal health care program to guarantee coverage to all Americans regardless of income." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health issues. Other or expanded principles: "I SUPPORT MENTAL HEALTH PARITY + GREATER ACCESS TO LONG TERM CARE THROUGH MEDICARE. I SUPPORT THERAPEUTIC (NOT REPRODUCTIVE) CLONING."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Providing health care is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Video: Affordable Care Act Anniversary Rally “ Rep. Schakowsky. 23 March 2011. "I will never forget that day March 23rd when the president signed the legislation into law I wept...this time it was so genuine because I look around this room...people have been fighting for so long...in order to get this legislation passed. I think the most important thing about that day is that the congress of the United States, the United States of America declared that health care is a right and not a privilege....Others made a different decision the day that that passed and their decision was...they were gonna say no to health-care for all Americans and they were gonna work as hard as they can to repeal the bill, not fix it, but to repeal the bill..." (youtu.be)
  • American Public Health Association. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the American Public Health Association 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2. 112th Congress. Repealing the Health Care Bill. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 01/19/2011. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Rejecting Repeal of Affordable Care Act. 6 January 2011. "We must reject the Republican call for repeal of the Affordable Care Act." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011. "I would like to say to the Republicans, be careful what you wish for. Your star is fading on this effort to repeal, to defund the Affordable Care Act. Only about 18 percent of Americans now are for full repeal of this bill. And are you the ones that are going to go and tell the American people that insurance companies can drop you when you get sick? Children with preexisting conditions? Well, they can be denied coverage. You go and explain that insurance companies can impose devastating annual and lifetime caps, and that pregnant women and breast cancer survivors can be denied coverage, and that being a woman will continue to be a preexisting condition. That's your mission if you were to succeed. In passing this legislation, the American people finally said, this Congress said, that health care is a right, that it should not impoverish individuals." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "The enactment of the Affordable Care Act is an historic accomplishment, expanding health coverage to over 30 million Americans while improving health care affordability and quality for everyone. At the same time, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects it will decrease the federal deficit by $143 billion through 2019. Included in the new law are many initiatives to improve how we deliver health care services, so that we reward quality--not merely quantity--and promote wellness and prevention to keep people healthy and avoid preventable and costly diseases. Those health promotion efforts will also lower costs beyond the savings that CBO estimated." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Issue Position: Senior Citizens. 10 November 2011. "I am pleased that the Affordable Care Act provides even more tools to fight waste, fraud and abuse." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Rep. Schakowsky Statement on the Anniversary of The Patient's Bill of Rights. 23 September 2011. "The Patients' Bill of Rights -- part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act -- is already working. We must act to ensure that we build on the successes of the last year by letting implementation move forward." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Repealing Prevention and Public Health Fund. 13 April 2011. "Here they go again. The Republicans failed in their efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and now they are reversing course and trying to cripple implementation by attacking individual provisions of the law...I want to be very clear, and you've heard it yourselves. This is simply another attempt by Republicans to defund the Affordable Care Act and stop its implementation. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill to repeal the Prevention and Public Health Fund." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Testimony on Republican Call to Repeal Health Care Reform. 6 January 2011. "The 111th Congress made history with the passage of the Affordable Care Act. We recognized, for the first time, that health care is a right. We recognized that health care costs should not impoverish individual Americans or cause them personal bankruptcies, and should not prevent small businesses from being able to prosper. The law makes health care affordable for the middle class, provides security for seniors, and guarantees access to health insurance coverage for the uninsured...Repealing health care would mean that Illinois, and the rest of the states, would no longer have access to resources to review proposed health insurance premium increases and hold insurance companies accountable for excessive, unjustified or unfairly discriminatory rate increases." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Providing health care is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Providing health care is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Testimony on Republican Call to Repeal Health Care Reform. 6 January 2011. "The 111th Congress made history with the passage of the Affordable Care Act. We recognized, for the first time, that health care is a right. We recognized that health care costs should not impoverish individual Americans or cause them personal bankruptcies, and should not prevent small businesses from being able to prosper. The law makes health care affordable for the middle class, provides security for seniors, and guarantees access to health insurance coverage for the uninsured...Repealing health care would mean that Illinois, and the rest of the states, would no longer have access to resources to review proposed health insurance premium increases and hold insurance companies accountable for excessive, unjustified or unfairly discriminatory rate increases." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Implement a universal health care program to guarantee coverage to all Americans regardless of income." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health care. Other or expanded principles: "I support increased funding for medical research, mental health parity & initiatives to eliminate health care disparities. I support a Medicare for all approach but in the interim support tax credits if used for comprehensive affordable coverage."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "g) Providing healthcare is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Implement a universal health care program to guarantee coverage to all Americans regardless of income." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health care. Other or expanded principles: "i) I SUPPORT A MEDICARE FOR ALL APPROACH BUT COULD SUPPORT SOME INCREASED TAX CREDITS DEPENDING ON AFFORABILITY/COMPREHENSIVENESS OF COVERAGE. I SUPPORT MENTAL HEALTH PARITY & EFFORTS TO ELIMINATE RACIAL/ETHNIC DISPARITIES."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Do you support a publicly-administered health insurance option?" Health Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): Only in the absence of single-payer and with rigorous consumer protection standards. Regarding question e): Allow this only with safety protections."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "b) Do you support expanding access to health care through commercial health insurance reform?" Health Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question b): Only in the absence of single-payer and with rigorous consumer protection standards. Regarding question e): Allow this only with safety protections."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Implement a universal healthcare program to guarantee coverage to all Americans, regardless of income." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health. Other or expanded principles: "C) With safety protections"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "b) Implement a universal health care program to guarantee coverage to all Americans regardless of income." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health issues. Other or expanded principles: "I SUPPORT MENTAL HEALTH PARITY + GREATER ACCESS TO LONG TERM CARE THROUGH MEDICARE. I SUPPORT THERAPEUTIC (NOT REPRODUCTIVE) CLONING."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Providing health care is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Video: Affordable Care Act Anniversary Rally “ Rep. Schakowsky. 23 March 2011. "I will never forget that day March 23rd when the president signed the legislation into law I wept...this time it was so genuine because I look around this room...people have been fighting for so long...in order to get this legislation passed. I think the most important thing about that day is that the congress of the United States, the United States of America declared that health care is a right and not a privilege....Others made a different decision the day that that passed and their decision was...they were gonna say no to health-care for all Americans and they were gonna work as hard as they can to repeal the bill, not fix it, but to repeal the bill..." (youtu.be)

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky. Daily Herald: Q&A: Schakowsky, Pollack, Ribeiro for 9th congressional. 23 October 2010. "But America's immigration system is broken and in desperate need of a solution. It is this dire need that will propel us to passage of comprehensive immigration reform. We've already seen an extreme example of misguided policy put forth by Arizona's recently-passed immigration law. Not only excessive and draconian, the Arizona law allows basic civil rights to be trampled by suspicion and prejudice. While an appellate court ruling struck down key provisions, the Arizona law must be scrapped entirely. Instead, I support an approach that protects our borders, allows people to fill jobs that don't attract American workers, requires those who are here illegally to step forward, register with the government so we can know who's here, and, if they have no criminal history, requires them to get work permits, pay their taxes, learn English, get legal status and eventually qualify for citizenship."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Issue Position: Immigration. 10 November 2011. "I support a comprehensive approach that creates orderly and enforceable regulation of immigration, allows people to fill jobs that don't attract American workers, requires those who are here illegally to step forward, register with the government so we can know who's here, and, if they have no criminal history, requires them to get work permits, pay their taxes, learn English, get legal status and eventually qualify for citizenship." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Says New Immigration Bill Unrealistic. 7 December 2005. "Congressman Sensenbrenner's bill [Border Protection, Anti-terrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 {H.R. 4437)] is unrealistic and only addresses the border and enforcement side of America's immigration challenges. It provides no opportunities for the millions of undocumented immigrants already in the United States, even those who work hard, are learning English, and are paying billions of dollars in taxes." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "I support an approach that protects our borders, allows people to fill jobs that don't attract American workers, requires those who are here illegally to step forward, register with the government so we can know who's here, and, if they have no criminal history, requires them to get work permits, pay their taxes, learn English, get legal status and eventually qualify for citizenship. These principles are all part of the legislation that I cosponsored, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform for American Security and Prosperity Act, H.R. 4321." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Cook County Leads the Nation in Support of Immigration Reform. 27 July 2005. "The current immigration system separates families, reduces the effectiveness of national security programs, allows labor abuses, and neglects the hard work and taxes that immigrants contribute to this county. In order for immigrants to succeed, they need immigration laws that make sense, that keep families together, that allow them to send their kids to college, that help them get better jobs and that ease their way to citizenship." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Calls for Real Immigration Reform. 20 September 2005. "The vast majority of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in this country are law-abiding, hard-working individuals who pay their taxes and are contributing to our society. They are our neighbors, fellow worshippers, and friends. They want to stay in this country, to continue their part to making it better, and they want to do so legally. They want their children to share in the opportunity of American and to help make this country even stronger and better. We want solutions. Every day someone dies in the desert. Every day in America, there are millions of immigrants working to provide services but living in fear, afraid to seek heath care and educational opportunities for their children. Every day immigrant families remain separated. Every day local communities struggle to deal with the consequences of our failed federal immigration policies. This is un-American, unsafe and unjust. We want viable, real solutions and we need them today." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Keynote Adress at Chicago Conference on Human Rights (Part 2 of 4). 13 April 2009. "Janet Napolitano, the secretary of homeland security announced a halt to all the ice raids...where you would have these [mumbles her words, possibly "people"] going into plants and knocking on doors at six o'clock in the morning here in our own city, where essentially were a pretty immigrant friendly place. And my district has people from all over the globe. That's our strength not our weakness. And yet there is this constant fear of a door knock that's going to separate families “ families who are here mainly as economic refugees to achieve the same thing as everyone else: they want a better life for their children, for their family, and opportunity." (youtu.be)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to President Obama. 23 November 2011. "As Secure Communities continues to expand, we write because we have been deeply troubled by the implementation of the program since its inception. We were further concerned when the Department of Homeland Security undermined the ability of states to opt out of the program by unilaterally terminating all Memoranda of Agreement with State Identification Bureaus across the country. Now, the recently released report of the task force established by DHS to review Secure Communities has led us to conclude that the program must immediately be terminated [¦] We urge you to immediately stop Secure Communities. We cannot make our communities safer by tearing them apart." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky's Statement On Arizona's Excessive Immigration Law. 26 April 2010. "The last 20 years have shown us that enforcement-only immigration policies just don't work. We need an immigration system that sets a logical pathway to legalization, allows families to stay intact, protects workers, and keeps America safe. That is why I am an original co-sponsor of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform ASAP Act, H.R. 4321. As a first-generation American, I know what this great country can do for hardworking families who come here to contribute and prosper. With H.R. 4321, we can carry on the proud American tradition of welcoming cultural diversity and becoming a stronger nation for it. With passage of H.R. 4321, we will pave the road to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants who are now living in the United States and also strengthen security measures to protect our borders." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Janet Napolitano, Secretary, Homeland Security, and Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General. 27 September 2011. "We applaud the August 18, 2011 announcement that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to close many low-priority immigration deportation proceedings. We especially commend DHS for stating that it will consider the family ties of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people as a factor in determining cases that merit relief from deportation, including for gay and lesbian foreign nationals who are the spouses and partners of U.S. citizens and permanent residents. We write to you today with two requests that will further the enforcement of this important mandate [¦] We ask that consideration of LGBT family ties be communicated in the guidance being prepared by the new DHS/DOJ working group [¦] Additionally, we ask that the working group include a member experienced in working with LGBT immigrants and their families to ensure that these factors are recognized and understood in the working group's case-by-case review of all individuals currently in removal proceedings as well as its review of new cases placed in removal proceedings. The vulnerability of LGBT immigrants -- the historical stigmatization of whom both within and outside the U.S. is well-documented -- makes knowledgeable review a necessity. The announcement on August 18 constitutes a major step forward in ensuring that immigration enforcement resources prioritize enhancing border security, national security, and public safety as well as in exercising discretion when warranted." (votesmart.org)
  • Melissa Apter. The Jewish Exponent: Arizona Law Triggers Renewed Attention to Immigration Reform. 29 April 2010. ""I believe that [Arizona's immigration law, S.B. 1070] has absolutely ignited a movement across this country for comprehensive immigration reform...You see people pouring out of their homes and into the streets and halls of government rejecting this notion of allowing our country to become a police state." (www.jewishexponent.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Illegal immigrants should be given a pathway to citizenship." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding immigration. Other or expanded principles: "C) Support if not used to replace Amer. workers, lower wages or undermine labor rights"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Do you support a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "f) Illegal immigrants should have to return to their countries of origin before being considered for citizenship."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Allow legalization for certain illegal immigrants working in the U.S."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Support amnesty for certain illegal immigrants who already reside in the United States."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Support amnesty for illegal immigrants already working in the United States."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "e) Support amnesty for illegal immigrants already working in the United States." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding immigration. Other or expanded principles: "I support a path to citizenship for undocumented persons"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "d) Do you support the enforcement of federal immigration laws by state and local police?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Grijalva Joined By Broad Cross-Section of Members of Congress In Praising Yesterday's First Ever Senate Hearing on The DREAM Act. 29 June 2011. "The Dream Act would enable young people to contribute to our economy, our military, and our country. These children, involuntarily brought here years earlier, see themselves as Americans. They should be embraced as the asset they are. To its credit Illinois has passed a limited version of the Dream Act, but now we need a national plan to address this issue comprehensively. I commend Senator Durbin's tireless efforts to make the dream of so many young immigrants a reality." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Video: Rep. Jan Schakowsky talks immigration reform. 16 March 2009. "...So many people that are doing everything they can to do best for their children, have a quality education, buy their own homes, pay taxes - they want to be citizens, we have to figure out that path. It could be done quickly." (youtu.be)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 5281. 112th Congress. DREAM Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 12/08/2010. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 4437. 109th Congress. Border Security Bill. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 12/16/2005. (votesmart.org)
  • National Latino Congreso/William C. Velásquez Institute. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of National Latino Congreso/William C. Velásquez Institute 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Federation for American Immigration Reform. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Federation for American Immigration Reform 0 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Daily Herald: Q&A: Schakowsky, Pollack, Ribeiro for 9th congressional. 23 October 2010. "But America's immigration system is broken and in desperate need of a solution. It is this dire need that will propel us to passage of comprehensive immigration reform. We've already seen an extreme example of misguided policy put forth by Arizona's recently-passed immigration law. Not only excessive and draconian, the Arizona law allows basic civil rights to be trampled by suspicion and prejudice. While an appellate court ruling struck down key provisions, the Arizona law must be scrapped entirely. Instead, I support an approach that protects our borders, allows people to fill jobs that don't attract American workers, requires those who are here illegally to step forward, register with the government so we can know who's here, and, if they have no criminal history, requires them to get work permits, pay their taxes, learn English, get legal status and eventually qualify for citizenship."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Issue Position: Immigration. 10 November 2011. "I support a comprehensive approach that creates orderly and enforceable regulation of immigration, allows people to fill jobs that don't attract American workers, requires those who are here illegally to step forward, register with the government so we can know who's here, and, if they have no criminal history, requires them to get work permits, pay their taxes, learn English, get legal status and eventually qualify for citizenship." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Says New Immigration Bill Unrealistic. 7 December 2005. "Congressman Sensenbrenner's bill [Border Protection, Anti-terrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 {H.R. 4437)] is unrealistic and only addresses the border and enforcement side of America's immigration challenges. It provides no opportunities for the millions of undocumented immigrants already in the United States, even those who work hard, are learning English, and are paying billions of dollars in taxes." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "I support an approach that protects our borders, allows people to fill jobs that don't attract American workers, requires those who are here illegally to step forward, register with the government so we can know who's here, and, if they have no criminal history, requires them to get work permits, pay their taxes, learn English, get legal status and eventually qualify for citizenship. These principles are all part of the legislation that I cosponsored, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform for American Security and Prosperity Act, H.R. 4321." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Cook County Leads the Nation in Support of Immigration Reform. 27 July 2005. "The current immigration system separates families, reduces the effectiveness of national security programs, allows labor abuses, and neglects the hard work and taxes that immigrants contribute to this county. In order for immigrants to succeed, they need immigration laws that make sense, that keep families together, that allow them to send their kids to college, that help them get better jobs and that ease their way to citizenship." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Calls for Real Immigration Reform. 20 September 2005. "The vast majority of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in this country are law-abiding, hard-working individuals who pay their taxes and are contributing to our society. They are our neighbors, fellow worshippers, and friends. They want to stay in this country, to continue their part to making it better, and they want to do so legally. They want their children to share in the opportunity of American and to help make this country even stronger and better. We want solutions. Every day someone dies in the desert. Every day in America, there are millions of immigrants working to provide services but living in fear, afraid to seek heath care and educational opportunities for their children. Every day immigrant families remain separated. Every day local communities struggle to deal with the consequences of our failed federal immigration policies. This is un-American, unsafe and unjust. We want viable, real solutions and we need them today." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Keynote Adress at Chicago Conference on Human Rights (Part 2 of 4). 13 April 2009. "Janet Napolitano, the secretary of homeland security announced a halt to all the ice raids...where you would have these [mumbles her words, possibly "people"] going into plants and knocking on doors at six o'clock in the morning here in our own city, where essentially were a pretty immigrant friendly place. And my district has people from all over the globe. That's our strength not our weakness. And yet there is this constant fear of a door knock that's going to separate families “ families who are here mainly as economic refugees to achieve the same thing as everyone else: they want a better life for their children, for their family, and opportunity." (youtu.be)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to President Obama. 23 November 2011. "As Secure Communities continues to expand, we write because we have been deeply troubled by the implementation of the program since its inception. We were further concerned when the Department of Homeland Security undermined the ability of states to opt out of the program by unilaterally terminating all Memoranda of Agreement with State Identification Bureaus across the country. Now, the recently released report of the task force established by DHS to review Secure Communities has led us to conclude that the program must immediately be terminated [¦] We urge you to immediately stop Secure Communities. We cannot make our communities safer by tearing them apart." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky's Statement On Arizona's Excessive Immigration Law. 26 April 2010. "The last 20 years have shown us that enforcement-only immigration policies just don't work. We need an immigration system that sets a logical pathway to legalization, allows families to stay intact, protects workers, and keeps America safe. That is why I am an original co-sponsor of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform ASAP Act, H.R. 4321. As a first-generation American, I know what this great country can do for hardworking families who come here to contribute and prosper. With H.R. 4321, we can carry on the proud American tradition of welcoming cultural diversity and becoming a stronger nation for it. With passage of H.R. 4321, we will pave the road to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants who are now living in the United States and also strengthen security measures to protect our borders." (votesmart.org)
  • Melissa Apter. The Jewish Exponent: Arizona Law Triggers Renewed Attention to Immigration Reform. 29 April 2010. ""I believe that [Arizona's immigration law, S.B. 1070] has absolutely ignited a movement across this country for comprehensive immigration reform...You see people pouring out of their homes and into the streets and halls of government rejecting this notion of allowing our country to become a police state." (www.jewishexponent.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Janet Napolitano, Secretary, Homeland Security, and Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General. 27 September 2011. "We applaud the August 18, 2011 announcement that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to close many low-priority immigration deportation proceedings. We especially commend DHS for stating that it will consider the family ties of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people as a factor in determining cases that merit relief from deportation, including for gay and lesbian foreign nationals who are the spouses and partners of U.S. citizens and permanent residents. We write to you today with two requests that will further the enforcement of this important mandate [¦] We ask that consideration of LGBT family ties be communicated in the guidance being prepared by the new DHS/DOJ working group [¦] Additionally, we ask that the working group include a member experienced in working with LGBT immigrants and their families to ensure that these factors are recognized and understood in the working group's case-by-case review of all individuals currently in removal proceedings as well as its review of new cases placed in removal proceedings. The vulnerability of LGBT immigrants -- the historical stigmatization of whom both within and outside the U.S. is well-documented -- makes knowledgeable review a necessity. The announcement on August 18 constitutes a major step forward in ensuring that immigration enforcement resources prioritize enhancing border security, national security, and public safety as well as in exercising discretion when warranted." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Illegal immigrants should be given a pathway to citizenship." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding immigration. Other or expanded principles: "C) Support if not used to replace Amer. workers, lower wages or undermine labor rights"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Do you support a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "f) Illegal immigrants should have to return to their countries of origin before being considered for citizenship."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "g) Allow legalization for certain illegal immigrants working in the U.S."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Support amnesty for certain illegal immigrants who already reside in the United States."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "e) Support amnesty for illegal immigrants already working in the United States."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "e) Support amnesty for illegal immigrants already working in the United States." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding immigration. Other or expanded principles: "I support a path to citizenship for undocumented persons"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "d) Do you support the enforcement of federal immigration laws by state and local police?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Grijalva Joined By Broad Cross-Section of Members of Congress In Praising Yesterday's First Ever Senate Hearing on The DREAM Act. 29 June 2011. "The Dream Act would enable young people to contribute to our economy, our military, and our country. These children, involuntarily brought here years earlier, see themselves as Americans. They should be embraced as the asset they are. To its credit Illinois has passed a limited version of the Dream Act, but now we need a national plan to address this issue comprehensively. I commend Senator Durbin's tireless efforts to make the dream of so many young immigrants a reality." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Video: Rep. Jan Schakowsky talks immigration reform. 16 March 2009. "...So many people that are doing everything they can to do best for their children, have a quality education, buy their own homes, pay taxes - they want to be citizens, we have to figure out that path. It could be done quickly." (youtu.be)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 5281. 112th Congress. DREAM Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 12/08/2010. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 4437. 109th Congress. Border Security Bill. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 12/16/2005. (votesmart.org)
  • National Latino Congreso/William C. Velásquez Institute. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of National Latino Congreso/William C. Velásquez Institute 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Federation for American Immigration Reform. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Federation for American Immigration Reform 0 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky signed the Freedom to Marry: Democrats Say I Do Pledge. "The Democratic Party supports the full inclusion of all families in the life of our nation, with equal respect, responsibility, and protection under the law, including the freedom to marry. Government has no business putting barriers in the path of people seeking to care for their family members, particularly in challenging economic times. We support the Respect for Marriage Act and the overturning of the federal so-called "Defense of Marriage Act," and oppose discriminatory constitutional amendments and other attempts to deny the freedom to marry to loving and committed same-sex couples." (www.freedomtomarry.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Marriage Protection Amendment. 18 July 2006. "Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex marriage. If this amendment were to pass, it would mean the first time in history that the Constitution has been amended to include discrimination. I believe in marriage as a stabilizing force in our society, as a nurturing environment for our children, as a public expression of the most profound love and devotion of a commitment between two people to take responsibility for one another, in a legal and a personal sense, in sickness and in health." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Should same-sex couples be allowed to marry?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "k) Should marriage be restricted to a union only between a man and a woman?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "a) Should marriage only be between one man and one woman?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "b) Do you support a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "j) Should same-sex couples be allowed to form civil unions?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "i) Do you support a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as a union between a man and woman?"
  • Jan Schakowksy. Rep. Schakowsky Joins 132 House Members to Challenge DOMA. 3 November 2011. "I am a strong supporter of marriage equality. The Defense of Marriage Act is not only unconscionable; it is also unconstitutional," Rep. Schakowsky said, "I have heard first-hand from constituents and friends who are discriminated against, and whose lives are negatively impacted by this bad law. It has to stop. I am proud to sign my name to this brief, which explains in great depth why DOMA must be struck down in federal court." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowksy. Schakowsky Speaks Out Against Attempt to Include Discrimination in Constitution. 14 August 2006. "But the same virtues of couplehood apply to any loving adults. Surely the 27 year relationship of my dear friends Michael and Roger do not threaten my marriage in any way. The loving family that Ann and Jackie expanded when they adopted David, giving him two adoring parents, is a good thing, regardless of what anyone may say to the contrary—and nothing in the Constitution should be established to discourage it. There are so many pressing issues working to undermine families. Same sex couples embrace the positive value of families. Let's spend our limited time here as law makers helping all families—and not discriminating against them." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "I fully support the right of gay and lesbian couples to wed, to be recognized as legal partners in marriage, and to be afforded all the rights and partner benefits currently given to heterosexual married couples." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Daily Herald: Q&A: Schakowksy, Pollak, Reibero for 9th Congressional. 23 October 2010. "I fully support the right of gay and lesbian couples to wed, to be recognized as legal partners in marriage, and to be afforded all the rights and partner benefits currently given to heterosexual married couples. I do not believe that marriage should be limited to the definition of the union of one man and one woman and I oppose the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The law is woefully misguided and I look forward to a day when it is overturned." (www.dailyherald.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Quigley, Gutierrez, Schakowsky Hold Hearing on Same-Sex Marriage. 17 October 2011. "It is essential that the United States of America provide full and equal marriage rights to all. The Defense of Marriage Act is a blatantly discriminatory law which must be overturned, either through Congressional repeal or a finding in the courts," said Rep. Schakowsky said. "Equal treatment is a fundamental aspect of our democracy, and LGBT rights count too. Polls over the last few years have shown that the public largely agrees. The tide of public opinion is now in our favor, but the fight continues. We must keep pushing and lobbying Congress to end discrimination." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Reacts to President Bush's Support of a Constitutional Amendment Opposing Gay Marriage. 24 February 2004. "For a President who supposedly prides himself on family values, why is he objecting to loving couples joining together in marriage? This is nothing more than a desperate attempt by President Bush to switch the nation's attention away from his failed policies and to restart his fledgling campaign. President Bush wants to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban gay marriage so he won't have to talk about his failed economic and international record. Most Americans would rather have a President who will create good jobs and lower their health care costs, instead of a leader willing to play politics with Americans while dividing our country." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Marriage Protection Act of 2004. 22 July 2004. "But this bill not only violates the principle of separation of powers, it also grossly violates our equal protection and due process rights. This bill singles out a group of people who simply want to live in peace with the person they love and denies them access to the courts in order to fight for equal rights. If we pass this bill, then I wonder who is next-what group of people is next on the target list for being singled out and denied rights? It strikes me that this bill is yet another example of how the Republican leadership in this country simply changes the rules when things aren't going their way so that the outcome will shift in their favor, regardless of the effects on our civil rights. We've seen votes held open for hours and funding cut off for popular and critical programs just so the Republican leadership can have their way. And, in this case, the Republican leadership is willing to go so far as to change the Constitutional rules and principles that we have lived by for centuries-the guarantee that any group or individual who feels their rights have been violated can go to court to seek redress-in order to protect a law that we passed eight years ago. This is simply unacceptable..." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan schakowsky. Schakowsky's Statement on Passage of Civil Unions in Illinois. 1 December 2010. '"This is a momentous day in Illinois and I commend the state House and Senate for taking a historic vote to pass civil unions legislation. With it, Illinois removes some of the most egregious barriers currently faced by gays and lesbians in our state, including the denial of hospital visiting rights to same-sex partners. This is a necessary and very important beginning. While today's vote is a major step forward in eliminating discrimination, I look forward to the day when every couple enjoys full marriage rights." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter To The Honorable President Obama, Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Schumer, And Chairwoman Lofgren. 9 February 2010. "Currently, U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses (and other immediate family members) for immigration purposes. But, same-sex partners committed to spending their lives together are not recognized as "families" under U.S. immigration law and thus do not have this same right. As a result, tens of thousands of binational families are either already living separately, face imminent separation, or have left the U.S. entirely in order to remain together. This is unacceptable, and we believe comprehensive immigration reform legislation must include a strong family reunification component inclusive of LGBT families." (votesmart.org)
  • Family Research Council. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Family Research Council 0 percent in 2006." (votesmart.org)
  • American Civil Liberties Union. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 100 percent in 2006." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2965. 112th Congress. Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 12/15/2010. (votesmart.org)
  • Human Rights Campaign. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H J Res 88. 110th Congress. Same-Sex Marriage Resolution. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 07/18/2006. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 3685. 110th Congress. Sexual Orientation Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA). Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 11/07/2007. (votesmart.org)
  • Traditional Values Coalition. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Traditional Values Coalition 14 percent in 2006" (votesmart.org)
  • American Family Association. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the American Family Association 5 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Mr. Robert Mazzuca, Chief Scout Executive, Boy Scouts of America. 1 February 2010. "We write in response to the Boy Scouts of America's (BSA) recent rejection of Cate and Elizabeth Wirth, two mothers of a Scout, who applied to serve as parent volunteers. We call on the Boy Scouts to end its policy of discrimination and exclusion based solely on sexual orientation [¦] For a century, the Boy Scouts have united communities, instilled the value of public service, and encouraged civic participation among America's youth. Congress has repeatedly recognized the importance of the Boy Scouts in our communities with numerous honors, including a Congressional charter and, most recently, a resolution expressing support for February 8, 2010 as "Boy Scouts of America Day". As you celebrate the 100th Anniversary of the Boy Scouts of America, it is long past time that the Boy Scouts finally provide the opportunity for all Scouts, Leaders, and volunteers, to share in the joys of Scouting, regardless of sexual orientation." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Pelosi, Nadler, 130 House Members File Amicus Brief on Federal Case Against DOMA. 10 July 2012. "Heightened scrutiny applies: the brief agrees with Justice Department's position that lesbians and gay men are an identifiable minority group that lack sufficient political power to obtain the consistent and favorable treatment of lawmakers; as a result, they need the protection that heightened judicial review provides. Congress's treatment of gay men and lesbians illustrates that this group has been unable to prevent harmful laws or achieve desired policy results that directly impact their lives. Gay men and lesbians are a historically disfavored minority that has often been targeted for legislative action based on stereotypes and bias, making it inappropriate for courts to grant laws like DOMA the same presumption of validity afforded to most acts of Congress. Instead, laws that single out gay men and lesbians for harm warrant judicial skepticism and heightened review. This requires the government to show that Section 3 serves a significant federal interest, and even BLAG seems to concede that it loses under this standard. Even under rational basis as applied by the Supreme Court in cases where the rights of a minority are at stake, Section 3 is unconstitutional. Section 3 does not achieve, but undermines, the actual interests served by the programs that take marital status into account, and denying recognition to couples who already are married under state law does not rationally serve any of the reasons relied upon by Congress in 1996 or created in response to this litigation." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Marriage Protection Amendment. 18 July 2006. "Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex marriage. If this amendment were to pass, it would mean the first time in history that the Constitution has been amended to include discrimination. I believe in marriage as a stabilizing force in our society, as a nurturing environment for our children, as a public expression of the most profound love and devotion of a commitment between two people to take responsibility for one another, in a legal and a personal sense, in sickness and in health." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "a) Should same-sex couples be allowed to marry?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "k) Should marriage be restricted to a union only between a man and a woman?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "a) Should marriage only be between one man and one woman?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "b) Do you support a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "j) Should same-sex couples be allowed to form civil unions?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "i) Do you support a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as a union between a man and woman?"
  • Jan Schakowksy. Rep. Schakowsky Joins 132 House Members to Challenge DOMA. 3 November 2011. "I am a strong supporter of marriage equality. The Defense of Marriage Act is not only unconscionable; it is also unconstitutional," Rep. Schakowsky said, "I have heard first-hand from constituents and friends who are discriminated against, and whose lives are negatively impacted by this bad law. It has to stop. I am proud to sign my name to this brief, which explains in great depth why DOMA must be struck down in federal court." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowksy. Schakowsky Speaks Out Against Attempt to Include Discrimination in Constitution. 14 August 2006. "But the same virtues of couplehood apply to any loving adults. Surely the 27 year relationship of my dear friends Michael and Roger do not threaten my marriage in any way. The loving family that Ann and Jackie expanded when they adopted David, giving him two adoring parents, is a good thing, regardless of what anyone may say to the contrary—and nothing in the Constitution should be established to discourage it. There are so many pressing issues working to undermine families. Same sex couples embrace the positive value of families. Let's spend our limited time here as law makers helping all families—and not discriminating against them." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "I fully support the right of gay and lesbian couples to wed, to be recognized as legal partners in marriage, and to be afforded all the rights and partner benefits currently given to heterosexual married couples." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Daily Herald: Q&A: Schakowksy, Pollak, Reibero for 9th Congressional. 23 October 2010. "I fully support the right of gay and lesbian couples to wed, to be recognized as legal partners in marriage, and to be afforded all the rights and partner benefits currently given to heterosexual married couples. I do not believe that marriage should be limited to the definition of the union of one man and one woman and I oppose the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The law is woefully misguided and I look forward to a day when it is overturned." (www.dailyherald.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Quigley, Gutierrez, Schakowsky Hold Hearing on Same-Sex Marriage. 17 October 2011. "It is essential that the United States of America provide full and equal marriage rights to all. The Defense of Marriage Act is a blatantly discriminatory law which must be overturned, either through Congressional repeal or a finding in the courts," said Rep. Schakowsky said. "Equal treatment is a fundamental aspect of our democracy, and LGBT rights count too. Polls over the last few years have shown that the public largely agrees. The tide of public opinion is now in our favor, but the fight continues. We must keep pushing and lobbying Congress to end discrimination." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Reacts to President Bush's Support of a Constitutional Amendment Opposing Gay Marriage. 24 February 2004. "For a President who supposedly prides himself on family values, why is he objecting to loving couples joining together in marriage? This is nothing more than a desperate attempt by President Bush to switch the nation's attention away from his failed policies and to restart his fledgling campaign. President Bush wants to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban gay marriage so he won't have to talk about his failed economic and international record. Most Americans would rather have a President who will create good jobs and lower their health care costs, instead of a leader willing to play politics with Americans while dividing our country." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Marriage Protection Act of 2004. 22 July 2004. "But this bill not only violates the principle of separation of powers, it also grossly violates our equal protection and due process rights. This bill singles out a group of people who simply want to live in peace with the person they love and denies them access to the courts in order to fight for equal rights. If we pass this bill, then I wonder who is next-what group of people is next on the target list for being singled out and denied rights? It strikes me that this bill is yet another example of how the Republican leadership in this country simply changes the rules when things aren't going their way so that the outcome will shift in their favor, regardless of the effects on our civil rights. We've seen votes held open for hours and funding cut off for popular and critical programs just so the Republican leadership can have their way. And, in this case, the Republican leadership is willing to go so far as to change the Constitutional rules and principles that we have lived by for centuries-the guarantee that any group or individual who feels their rights have been violated can go to court to seek redress-in order to protect a law that we passed eight years ago. This is simply unacceptable..." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan schakowsky. Schakowsky's Statement on Passage of Civil Unions in Illinois. 1 December 2010. '"This is a momentous day in Illinois and I commend the state House and Senate for taking a historic vote to pass civil unions legislation. With it, Illinois removes some of the most egregious barriers currently faced by gays and lesbians in our state, including the denial of hospital visiting rights to same-sex partners. This is a necessary and very important beginning. While today's vote is a major step forward in eliminating discrimination, I look forward to the day when every couple enjoys full marriage rights." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter To The Honorable President Obama, Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Schumer, And Chairwoman Lofgren. 9 February 2010. "Currently, U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses (and other immediate family members) for immigration purposes. But, same-sex partners committed to spending their lives together are not recognized as "families" under U.S. immigration law and thus do not have this same right. As a result, tens of thousands of binational families are either already living separately, face imminent separation, or have left the U.S. entirely in order to remain together. This is unacceptable, and we believe comprehensive immigration reform legislation must include a strong family reunification component inclusive of LGBT families." (votesmart.org)
  • Family Research Council. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Family Research Council 0 percent in 2006." (votesmart.org)
  • American Civil Liberties Union. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 100 percent in 2006." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2965. 112th Congress. Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 12/15/2010. (votesmart.org)
  • Human Rights Campaign. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Human Rights Campaign 100 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. H J Res 88. 110th Congress. Same-Sex Marriage Resolution. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 07/18/2006. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 3685. 110th Congress. Sexual Orientation Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA). Jan Schakowsky voted Yea on 11/07/2007. (votesmart.org)
  • Traditional Values Coalition. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Traditional Values Coalition 14 percent in 2006" (votesmart.org)
  • American Family Association. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the American Family Association 5 percent in 2010." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky signed the Freedom to Marry: Democrats Say I Do Pledge. "The Democratic Party supports the full inclusion of all families in the life of our nation, with equal respect, responsibility, and protection under the law, including the freedom to marry. Government has no business putting barriers in the path of people seeking to care for their family members, particularly in challenging economic times. We support the Respect for Marriage Act and the overturning of the federal so-called "Defense of Marriage Act," and oppose discriminatory constitutional amendments and other attempts to deny the freedom to marry to loving and committed same-sex couples." (www.freedomtomarry.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Mr. Robert Mazzuca, Chief Scout Executive, Boy Scouts of America. 1 February 2010. "We write in response to the Boy Scouts of America's (BSA) recent rejection of Cate and Elizabeth Wirth, two mothers of a Scout, who applied to serve as parent volunteers. We call on the Boy Scouts to end its policy of discrimination and exclusion based solely on sexual orientation [¦] For a century, the Boy Scouts have united communities, instilled the value of public service, and encouraged civic participation among America's youth. Congress has repeatedly recognized the importance of the Boy Scouts in our communities with numerous honors, including a Congressional charter and, most recently, a resolution expressing support for February 8, 2010 as "Boy Scouts of America Day". As you celebrate the 100th Anniversary of the Boy Scouts of America, it is long past time that the Boy Scouts finally provide the opportunity for all Scouts, Leaders, and volunteers, to share in the joys of Scouting, regardless of sexual orientation." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Pelosi, Nadler, 130 House Members File Amicus Brief on Federal Case Against DOMA. 10 July 2012. "Heightened scrutiny applies: the brief agrees with Justice Department's position that lesbians and gay men are an identifiable minority group that lack sufficient political power to obtain the consistent and favorable treatment of lawmakers; as a result, they need the protection that heightened judicial review provides. Congress's treatment of gay men and lesbians illustrates that this group has been unable to prevent harmful laws or achieve desired policy results that directly impact their lives. Gay men and lesbians are a historically disfavored minority that has often been targeted for legislative action based on stereotypes and bias, making it inappropriate for courts to grant laws like DOMA the same presumption of validity afforded to most acts of Congress. Instead, laws that single out gay men and lesbians for harm warrant judicial skepticism and heightened review. This requires the government to show that Section 3 serves a significant federal interest, and even BLAG seems to concede that it loses under this standard. Even under rational basis as applied by the Supreme Court in cases where the rights of a minority are at stake, Section 3 is unconstitutional. Section 3 does not achieve, but undermines, the actual interests served by the programs that take marital status into account, and denying recognition to couples who already are married under state law does not rationally serve any of the reasons relied upon by Congress in 1996 or created in response to this litigation." (votesmart.org)

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Chairman McKeon. 10 May 2011 "Among the many troubling aspects of the Detainee Security Act are provisions that expand the war against terrorist organizations on a global basis. The Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) of 2001 was widely thought to provide authorization for the war in Afghanistan to root out al Qaeda, the Taliban, and others responsible for the 9/11 attacks. That war has dragged on for almost ten years, and after the demise of Osama Bin Laden, as the United States prepares for withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Detainee Security Act purports to expand the 'armed conflict' against the Taliban, al Qaeda, and "associated forces" without limit. By declaring a global war against nameless individuals, organizations, and nations "associated" with the Taliban and al Qaeda, as well as those playing a supporting role in their efforts, the Detainee Security Act would appear to grant the President near unfettered authority to initiate military action around the world without further congressional approval. Such authority must not be ceded to the President without careful deliberation from Congress." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "d) Should the United States continue to strike suspected terrorist targets in Pakistan?" International Policy Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question d): Only known terrorist targets."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "e) Do you support pre-emptive military strikes against countries deemed to be a threat to United States national security?" Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding national security. Other or expanded principles: "C) Assume the question means terrorists who posed an imminent threat to the U.S. and that it includes working with countries like Afghanistan to address terrorism"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "f) Do you support a policy of pre-emptive strikes against countries deemed to be a threat to national security?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Chairman McKeon. 10 May 2011 "Among the many troubling aspects of the Detainee Security Act are provisions that expand the war against terrorist organizations on a global basis. The Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) of 2001 was widely thought to provide authorization for the war in Afghanistan to root out al Qaeda, the Taliban, and others responsible for the 9/11 attacks. That war has dragged on for almost ten years, and after the demise of Osama Bin Laden, as the United States prepares for withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Detainee Security Act purports to expand the 'armed conflict' against the Taliban, al Qaeda, and "associated forces" without limit. By declaring a global war against nameless individuals, organizations, and nations "associated" with the Taliban and al Qaeda, as well as those playing a supporting role in their efforts, the Detainee Security Act would appear to grant the President near unfettered authority to initiate military action around the world without further congressional approval. Such authority must not be ceded to the President without careful deliberation from Congress." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "d) Should the United States continue to strike suspected terrorist targets in Pakistan?" International Policy Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question d): Only known terrorist targets."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "e) Do you support pre-emptive military strikes against countries deemed to be a threat to United States national security?" Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding national security. Other or expanded principles: "C) Assume the question means terrorists who posed an imminent threat to the U.S. and that it includes working with countries like Afghanistan to address terrorism"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "f) Do you support a policy of pre-emptive strikes against countries deemed to be a threat to national security?"

Vote Smart's Research

  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "a) Do you support privatizing elements of Social Security?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts which they manage themselves."
  • Jan Schakowksy. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid: Keeping Faith with America's Seniors, the Disabled, and the Needy. 13 October 2011. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Encourages Constituents to Use Online calculator. 10 March 2005. "The American people understand that Social Security faces some long-term challenges. But they also understand that Democrats and Republicans must work together to find the right solution to strengthen, not privatize, Social Security." (votesmart.org)
  • Alliance for Retired Americans. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Alliance for Retired Americans 100 percent in 2008." (votesmart.org)
  • Tim Wheeler. People's World: Attacks on Social Security called "un-American". 4 October 2011. ""The Republicans will argue that the Democrats will bankrupt Social Security and they will keep Social Security solvent...Yet the truth is, the Republican budget authored by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is a complete privatization of Social Security, a plan to turn Social Security over to the tender mercies of the insurance corporations." (www.peoplesworld.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Seniors Task Force Co-Chairs Highlight Importance of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security for American Women, Families. 26 August 2011. "House Democrats have also stood firm in their efforts to protect Social Security from Republican efforts to privatize it. Like cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, GOP efforts to privatize Social Security would have a particularly damaging impact on women, since women, on average, are even more dependent on Social Security than men for their retirement security. In fact, Social Security is virtually the only source of income for three in ten women on Social Security who are 65 and older, compared to two in ten men. Among Social Security beneficiaries 80 and older, Social Security is virtually the only source of income for 38 percent of women, compared to 25 percent of men. The average Social Security benefit for women 65 and older is only about $12,000 per year, compared to nearly $16,000 for men 65 and older. The hard truth is that without Social Security, half of women 65 and older would be below the poverty line." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Vote Democrat: Seniors Task Force Co-Chairs Call on Super Committee to Protect Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security for Seniors. 13 October 2011. "I hope that the members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction will push for real reforms “ reforms that work “ and not cut our bedrock programs that ensure financial security for seniors...We need to find savings in health care that promote wellness, reduce unnecessary care, and lower drug prices. We should not throw up financial barriers that save money by denying people the care they need. We can avoid burdening seniors only if we ensure that revenues are a significant part of the solution “ at least 50% of any deficit reduction proposal." (votedem.info)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Democratic Leader Pelosi. 25 July 2011. "We write in strong agreement with your unwavering defense of the Democratic programs that form the bedrock of America's middle and working classes, and which are overwhelmingly popular. On July 7, you made very clear that "We are not going to balance the budget on the backs of America's seniors, women and people with disabilities" and that "we do not support cuts in benefits" for vital safety-net programs. We agree completely. Especially in these tough economic times, we should not be cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits that millions of our constituents paid into and depend on. Such benefit cuts should be off the table in current debt discussions. Our Republican colleagues should be embarrassed by their insistence that unless Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits are cut, the nation will default on its debts. Middle-class families have sacrificed enough, and a deal that pushes the American Dream further out of reach, in order to pay for extending tax breaks for the rich and corporations, is simply unacceptable. We are united as Democrats in saying that it's time to stand up to the Republican hostage-taking. We will not be forced to vote for a "final agreement" that we do not agree to -- and that the American people do not agree to. We stand united with you in insisting that benefit cuts for working families, our seniors, children, and people with disabilities must be off the table, and we stand united with you in fighting for millions of Americans who need Democrats to be firmly on their side." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction. 13 October 2011. "We are writing to request that you protect vital programs that comprise our social safety net, including but not limited to Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, as well as the programs that provide economic security and opportunity to millions of Americans [¦] It is imperative that we protect vital safety net programs and programs that provide economic security and opportunity to millions of Americans, including those facing or living in poverty. The Census Bureau released data on September 13, 2011, revealing that 15 percent of Americans -- 46.2 million people across this country -- lived in poverty in 2010. This is the largest number of Americans living in poverty since the Census started collecting this data 52 years ago. For our nation's children under 18, 22 percent lived in poverty in 2010. That is 16.4 million children who do not know where their next meal is coming from, where they might be sleeping that night, and who are anxious overall about their well being and that of their parents." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts which they manage themselves."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "b) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts managed by private firms contracted by the government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "b) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts managed by private firms contracted by the government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "b) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts managed by private firms contracted by the government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "" for: "a) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts that they manage themselves."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts which they manage themselves."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "a) Do you support privatizing elements of Social Security?"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts which they manage themselves."
  • Jan Schakowksy. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid: Keeping Faith with America's Seniors, the Disabled, and the Needy. 13 October 2011. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Schakowsky Encourages Constituents to Use Online calculator. 10 March 2005. "The American people understand that Social Security faces some long-term challenges. But they also understand that Democrats and Republicans must work together to find the right solution to strengthen, not privatize, Social Security." (votesmart.org)
  • Alliance for Retired Americans. 04/18/2012. "Jan Schakowsky supported the interests of the Alliance for Retired Americans 100 percent in 2008." (votesmart.org)
  • Tim Wheeler. People's World: Attacks on Social Security called "un-American". 4 October 2011. ""The Republicans will argue that the Democrats will bankrupt Social Security and they will keep Social Security solvent...Yet the truth is, the Republican budget authored by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is a complete privatization of Social Security, a plan to turn Social Security over to the tender mercies of the insurance corporations." (www.peoplesworld.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Seniors Task Force Co-Chairs Highlight Importance of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security for American Women, Families. 26 August 2011. "House Democrats have also stood firm in their efforts to protect Social Security from Republican efforts to privatize it. Like cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, GOP efforts to privatize Social Security would have a particularly damaging impact on women, since women, on average, are even more dependent on Social Security than men for their retirement security. In fact, Social Security is virtually the only source of income for three in ten women on Social Security who are 65 and older, compared to two in ten men. Among Social Security beneficiaries 80 and older, Social Security is virtually the only source of income for 38 percent of women, compared to 25 percent of men. The average Social Security benefit for women 65 and older is only about $12,000 per year, compared to nearly $16,000 for men 65 and older. The hard truth is that without Social Security, half of women 65 and older would be below the poverty line." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Democratic Leader Pelosi. 25 July 2011. "We write in strong agreement with your unwavering defense of the Democratic programs that form the bedrock of America's middle and working classes, and which are overwhelmingly popular. On July 7, you made very clear that "We are not going to balance the budget on the backs of America's seniors, women and people with disabilities" and that "we do not support cuts in benefits" for vital safety-net programs. We agree completely. Especially in these tough economic times, we should not be cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits that millions of our constituents paid into and depend on. Such benefit cuts should be off the table in current debt discussions. Our Republican colleagues should be embarrassed by their insistence that unless Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits are cut, the nation will default on its debts. Middle-class families have sacrificed enough, and a deal that pushes the American Dream further out of reach, in order to pay for extending tax breaks for the rich and corporations, is simply unacceptable. We are united as Democrats in saying that it's time to stand up to the Republican hostage-taking. We will not be forced to vote for a "final agreement" that we do not agree to -- and that the American people do not agree to. We stand united with you in insisting that benefit cuts for working families, our seniors, children, and people with disabilities must be off the table, and we stand united with you in fighting for millions of Americans who need Democrats to be firmly on their side." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Vote Democrat: Seniors Task Force Co-Chairs Call on Super Committee to Protect Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security for Seniors. 13 October 2011. "I hope that the members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction will push for real reforms “ reforms that work “ and not cut our bedrock programs that ensure financial security for seniors...We need to find savings in health care that promote wellness, reduce unnecessary care, and lower drug prices. We should not throw up financial barriers that save money by denying people the care they need. We can avoid burdening seniors only if we ensure that revenues are a significant part of the solution “ at least 50% of any deficit reduction proposal." (votedem.info)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts which they manage themselves."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "b) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts managed by private firms contracted by the government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Letter to Members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction. 13 October 2011. "We are writing to request that you protect vital programs that comprise our social safety net, including but not limited to Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, as well as the programs that provide economic security and opportunity to millions of Americans [¦] It is imperative that we protect vital safety net programs and programs that provide economic security and opportunity to millions of Americans, including those facing or living in poverty. The Census Bureau released data on September 13, 2011, revealing that 15 percent of Americans -- 46.2 million people across this country -- lived in poverty in 2010. This is the largest number of Americans living in poverty since the Census started collecting this data 52 years ago. For our nation's children under 18, 22 percent lived in poverty in 2010. That is 16.4 million children who do not know where their next meal is coming from, where they might be sleeping that night, and who are anxious overall about their well being and that of their parents." (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "b) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts managed by private firms contracted by the government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "b) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts managed by private firms contracted by the government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "" for: "a) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts that they manage themselves."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "a) Allow workers to invest a portion of their payroll tax in private accounts which they manage themselves."

Key

Candidate Answer Official Position

Candidate had the Political Courage to address this issue directly.

Inferred Answer Inferred Position

Candidate refused to address this issue directly, but Project Vote Smart inferred this issue position based on the candidate's public statements, voting record, and evaluations from special interest groups.

Unknown Answer Unknown Position

Candidate refused to address this issue.

 Project Vote Smart's Research

Click on this icon to reveal more information about this candidate's position.

Illinois Congressional Election 2012 Political Courage Test

This candidate has responded to a Political Courage Test in a previous election. As a continued effort to provide the American public with factual information on candidates running for public office, these archived responses are made available here.

Pro-choiceCandidate AnswerDo you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?
Other or expanded principles
NoCandidate AnswerDo you support United States' combat operations in Afghanistan?
YesDo you support a timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan?
Other or expanded principles

Indicate which proposals you support (if any) for balancing the federal budget.

In order to balance the budget,

YesCandidate Answerdo you support reducing defense spending?
YesCandidate Answerdo you support an income tax increase on any tax bracket?
Nodo you support reducing Medicaid spending?
Nodo you support reducing Medicare spending?
NoIs balancing the budget a legislative priority?
Other or expanded principles

We need to address the deficit, and the First step is to create jobs and strengthen the economy. Over the longer term we need to bring down the deficit in a way that is balanced and does not shift the burden to the middle class and the poor, and I have proposed plans and legislation that would do so.

YesDo you support the regulation of indirect campaign contributions from corporations and unions?
Other or expanded principles

I support a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in Citizen's United.

NoDo you support capital punishment for certain crimes?
Other or expanded principles
YesCandidate AnswerDo you support federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth?
YesCandidate AnswerDo you support providing tax incentives to businesses for the purpose of job creation?
YesDo you support spending on infrastructure projects for the purpose of job creation?
YesDo you support the temporary extension of unemployment benefits?
YesDo you support the 2010 temporary extension of tax relief?
Other or expanded principles

I support extending the tax cuts for the middle class and not for income over $250,000

YesInferred Answer Do you support requiring states to implement education reforms in order to be eligible for competitive federal grants? View Citations
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards and testing of public school students." Indicate which principles you support (if any) concerning education. Other or expanded principles: "I SUPPORT INITIATIVES TO IMPROVE TEACHER QUALITY, INCLUDING TESTING, BUT NOT MERIT PAY."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "b) Do you support federal funding for universal pre-K programs?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "d) Education" Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. Other or expanded principles: "Regarding sections a) Agriculture, c) Defense, and g) International aid: I support increases in some areas and cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards for and testing of public school students."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. d) Education" Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. Other or expanded principles: "Regarding sections a) Agriculture, c) Defense, and g) International aid: I support increases in some areas and cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "k) Eliminate all federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind)."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. d) Education" 1) Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "A), C), H), I), and J) - These are broad categories - I support increases in some areas, cuts in others"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Using the key, indicate what federal funding levels you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. [?] d) Education" Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "a, c, g, h--These categories are too broad. I support increases in some areas & cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Providing education is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Using the key, indicate what federal funding levels you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category. d) Education" Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "(Agriculture, Defense, International aid, Law enforcement) THESE CATEGORIES ARE TOO BROAD. I SUPPORT INCREASES IN SOME AREAS & CUTS IN OTHERS."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "d) Do you support federal funding for K-12 school vouchers?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "a) Do you support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "i) Eliminate restrictions on federal education funding, giving educators or local school districts more flexibility to design and implement their programs."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind)."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards for and testing of public school students."
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2300. 106th Congress. Academic Achievement for All Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 10/21/1999. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "The Race to the Top competition has created an incentive for school districts and local organizations to partner with one another to implement new ideas. A number of people have raised serious questions about certain aspects of the President's agenda for education, such as the move towards charter schools or the use of competitive grants. That said, the Race to the Top program has jumpstarted the national conversation about how to make education work better for this country's children and has already begun to implement real change [¦] varying standards make identifying and implementing innovative education programs on a large scale extremely difficult, and I applaud recent state efforts largely undertaken because of Race to the Top to adopt national standards." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support the federal government funding universal pre-K programs." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding education. Other or expanded principles: "I support federal standards, but believe NCLB needs to be significantly overhauled"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2012 Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected NO ANSWER for: "a) Do you support requiring states to implement education reforms in order to be eligible for competitive federal grants?;" Other or expanded principles: "I support strong standards for our educational system but believe that No Child Left Behind needs to be substantially overhauled, and that teachers must play a significant role in any education reform we do."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support the federal government funding universal pre-K programs." Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding education. Other or expanded principles: "I support federal standards, but believe NCLB needs to be significantly overhauled"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Yes" for: "b) Do you support federal funding for universal pre-K programs?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "d) Education" Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. Other or expanded principles: "Regarding sections a) Agriculture, c) Defense, and g) International aid: I support increases in some areas and cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards for and testing of public school students."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. d) Education" Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category- you can use a number more than once. Other or expanded principles: "Regarding sections a) Agriculture, c) Defense, and g) International aid: I support increases in some areas and cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "k) Eliminate all federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind)."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Indicate what federal funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. d) Education" 1) Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "A), C), H), I), and J) - These are broad categories - I support increases in some areas, cuts in others"
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2006 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Using the key, indicate what federal funding levels you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category, you can use a number more than once. [?] d) Education" Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "a, c, g, h--These categories are too broad. I support increases in some areas & cuts in others."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Providing education is not a responsibility of the federal government."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "Greatly Increase" for: "Using the key, indicate what federal funding levels you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category. d) Education" Budget Priorities Other or expanded principles: "(Agriculture, Defense, International aid, Law enforcement) THESE CATEGORIES ARE TOO BROAD. I SUPPORT INCREASES IN SOME AREAS & CUTS IN OTHERS."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "d) Do you support federal funding for K-12 school vouchers?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards and testing of public school students." Indicate which principles you support (if any) concerning education. Other or expanded principles: "I SUPPORT INITIATIVES TO IMPROVE TEACHER QUALITY, INCLUDING TESTING, BUT NOT MERIT PAY."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2010 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected "No" for: "a) Do you support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students?" Education Issues Other or expanded principles: "Regarding question a): I support federal standards but believe No Child Left Behind needs to be significantly overhauled. Regarding question c): I think charter schools need to comply with all the rules for public schools."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2002 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "i) Eliminate restrictions on federal education funding, giving educators or local school districts more flexibility to design and implement their programs."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2008 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Did Not Check SUPPORT for: "j) Support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind)."
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2004 Illinois Congressional Political Courage Test. Checked SUPPORT for: "a) Support national standards for and testing of public school students."
  • Jan Schakowsky. HR 2300. 106th Congress. Academic Achievement for All Act. Jan Schakowsky voted Nay on 10/21/1999. (votesmart.org)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Chicago Sun-Times: U.S. House, Dist. 9: Jan Schakowsky. 8 November 2011. "The Race to the Top competition has created an incentive for school districts and local organizations to partner with one another to implement new ideas. A number of people have raised serious questions about certain aspects of the President's agenda for education, such as the move towards charter schools or the use of competitive grants. That said, the Race to the Top program has jumpstarted the national conversation about how to make education work better for this country's children and has already begun to implement real change [¦] varying standards make identifying and implementing innovative education programs on a large scale extremely difficult, and I applaud recent state efforts largely undertaken because of Race to the Top to adopt national standards." (www.suntimes.com)
  • Jan Schakowsky. Project Vote Smart: 2012 Congressional Political Courage Test. Selected NO ANSWER for: "a) Do you support requiring states to implement education reforms in order to be eligible for competitive federal grants?;" Other or expanded principles: "I support strong standards for our educational system but believe that No Child Left Behind needs to be substantially overhauled, and that teachers must play a significant role in any education reform we do."
Other or expanded principles

I support strong standards for our educational system but believe that No Child Left Behind needs to be substantially overhauled, and that teachers must play a significant role in any education reform we do.

NoCandidate AnswerDo you support reducing restrictions on offshore energy production?
Other or expanded principles
YesDo you believe that human activity is contributing to climate change?
YesCandidate AnswerDo you support the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions?
Other or expanded principles
YesCandidate AnswerDo you support restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns?
Other or expanded principles
NoCandidate AnswerDo you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act?
YesShould individuals be required to purchase health insurance, as mandated in the 2010 Affordable Care Act?
Other or expanded principles
NoCandidate AnswerDo you support requiring illegal immigrants to return to their country of origin before they are eligible for citizenship?
YesDo you support allowing illegal immigrants, who were brought to the United States as minors, to pursue citizenship without returning to their country of origin?
NoDo you support the enforcement of federal immigration law by state and local police?
Other or expanded principles
YesCandidate AnswerDo you support same-sex marriage?
Other or expanded principles
YesCandidate AnswerDo you support targeting suspected terrorists outside of official theaters of conflict?
Should the U.S use military force in order to prevent Iran from possessing a nuclear weapon?
Other or expanded principles

I do not support military action against Iran at this time, but I do not believe we can take it off the table for the future. We need to fully exhaust all diplomatic + economic options before considering military force.

NoCandidate AnswerDo you support allowing individuals to divert a portion of their Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts?
Other or expanded principles

Spending

Indicate what federal spending levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category; you can use a number more than once.

a) Agriculture
Slightly Increaseb) Arts
Greatly Decreasec) Defense
Greatly Increased) Education
Slightly Increasee) Environment
Maintain Statusf) Homeland Security
g) International aid
Slightly Increaseh) Medical Research
Slightly Increasei) Scientific Research
Slightly Increasej) Space exploration
Maintain Statusk) United Nations
Slightly Increasel) Welfare
m) Other or expanded categories

[a) Agriculture] Candidate drew a "*"
[g) International aid] Candidate drew a "*"

*I support increases in some areas and cuts in others.

Taxes

Indicate what federal tax levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one number per category; you can use a number more than once.

Slightly Increasea) Capital gains taxes
Slightly Increaseb) Corporate taxes
Maintain Statusc) Excise taxes (alcohol)
Slightly Increased) Excise taxes (cigarettes)
Maintain Statuse) Excise taxes (transportation fuel)
Slightly Decreasef) Income taxes (low-income families)
Maintain Statusg) Income taxes (middle-income families)
Greatly Increaseh) Income taxes (high-income families)
Slightly Increasei) Inheritance taxes
Maintain Statusj) Payroll taxes
k) Other or expanded categories
Please explain in a total of 100 words or less, your top two or three priorities if elected. If they require additional funding for implementation, please explain how you would obtain this funding.

We need to act aggressively to protect the middle class and provide opportunities to those who aspire to it. This means that we need to be aggressive in creating and supporting good jobs - jobs that provide adequate pay and benefits. We need to expand access to health care and make sure that children have access to quality education. We need to stop the housing foreclosure crisis that threatens so many families. And we need to protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. We can pay for these priorities by asking more from millionaires, billionaires, and rich corporations that ship jobs...