Kevin Hern headshot
At a Glance
Seat
Representative for Oklahoma District 1
Born
December 4, 1961
Age 64
Phone
(202) 225-2211
Office
171 Cannon House Office Building, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Republican|Oklahoma District 1

Kevin Hern

Voting Record — 593
Yes76%
No21%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align97%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map

Congressional District 1

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Kevin Hern headshot
Kevin Hern
U.S. RepresentativeRepublicanOklahoma District 1
SoupScore
Kevin's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 18 sponsored · 30 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

If we were sunnier, I would be a huge defender of the UK's net zero policy, because solar is quite clearly going to underpin prosperity in the latter half of this century. I'm much less confident about wind, and think our path ahead is unsettlingly expensive
quite possibly! My fear — and the reason I give some time to the latter of the two cases — is that _solar_ looks like it's progressing rapidly to become the engine of future prosperity. And we're cloudy and northern.
my fear is that we specifically have a shitty position here. solar is an inevitable market and we're cloudy and northern; wind feels far more… evitable… and even though we're good at it, the cost curve stubbornly refuses to bend
I think there's a few good reasons for the UK to lead the way on net zero — it may materially motivate action amongst bigger polluters, it lets us build up the post-fossil tech stack earlier, if you're gonna do it anyway you may as well get it over with — but I'm not convinced they're a slam dunk
wish there was more engagement with the distinction between "net zero is bad" and "the UK leading the way on net zero is bad". former is nonsense talking from barely reformed climate denialists but the latter deserves a better answer than "oh you like climate change do you?"
If you structure it as a Monty Hall equivalent, then yeah, you absolutely should swap: "you select a box, then the host opens the lowest prize. Do you swap with a random remaining box?" yes you do. And you can repeat that every round and you should swap every round.
Right. If you structure the query in DOND terms it's: "You select a box, then open every box other than the grand prize and the bottom prize; should you swap?" I think it's hard to say "yes", because the structure of the problem has left you with the same 5050 opportunity
key difference is that Monty Hall only has the counterintuitive outcome _because the person opening the door has knowledge you don't have_. In DOND, swapping can never have any effect, because no-one has added any information to the mix
Yes but the counterpoint here is that the thread is also implicitly an explanation of why HDM is SO good, since it does the same shift and pulls it off
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
593 total votes
ExpandCollapse

Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.

DateBillQuestionPositionParty MajAlign?Result
2026-03-04H. Res. 1100 (119th)Motion to ReferYESYESPassed
2026-03-04H.R. 6472 (119th)Fast-track passageYESYESPassed
2026-03-04S. 723 (119th)Fast-track passageYESYESPassed
2026-03-04H. Res. 1095 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESPassed
2026-03-04H. Res. 1095 (119th)End debate nowYESYESPassed
2026-02-25H.R. 4758 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-25H.R. 4758 (119th)Send back to committeeNONOFailed
2026-02-24H.R. 4626 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-24H.R. 4626 (119th)Send back to committeeNONOFailed
2026-02-24H. Res. 1075 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESPassed
2026-02-24H. Res. 1075 (119th)End debate nowYESYESPassed
2026-02-24S. 2503 (119th)Fast-track passageNONOFailed
2026-02-24H.R. 6329 (119th)Fast-track passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-12H.R. 2189 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-11S. 1383 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-11S. 1383 (119th)Motion to CommitNONOFailed
2026-02-11H.R. 261 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-11H.R. 261 (119th)Send back to committeeNONOFailed
2026-02-11H.J. Res. 72 (119th)Final passageNONOPassed
2026-02-11H.R. 3617 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-11H.R. 3617 (119th)Send back to committeeNONOFailed
2026-02-11H. Res. 1057 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESPassed
2026-02-11H. Res. 1057 (119th)End debate nowYESYESPassed
2026-02-11H. Res. 1042 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESFailed
2026-02-11H. Res. 1042 (119th)End debate nowYESYESPassed
2026-02-10H.R. 1531 (119th)Fast-track passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-09H.R. 6644 (119th)Fast-track passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-04H.J. Res. 142 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-04H.R. 4090 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-04H.R. 4090 (119th)Send back to committeeNONOFailed
2026-02-03H.R. 7148 (119th)Accept Senate changesYESYESPassed
2026-02-03H. Res. 1032 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESPassed
2026-02-03H. Res. 1032 (119th)End debate nowYESYESPassed
2026-02-03H.R. 3123 (119th)Fast-track passageYESYESPassed
2026-02-02H.R. 980 (119th)Fast-track passageYESYESPassed
2026-01-22H. Con. Res. 68 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOFailed
2026-01-22H.R. 6359 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-01-22H.R. 6359 (119th)Send back to committeeNONOFailed
2026-01-22H.R. 7148 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-01-22H.R. 7148 (119th)Approve amendmentYESYESFailed
2026-01-22H.R. 7148 (119th)Approve amendmentYESYESFailed
2026-01-22H.R. 7147 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-01-22H. Res. 1014 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESPassed
2026-01-22H. Res. 1014 (119th)Approve amendmentYESYESAgreed to
2026-01-22H. Res. 1014 (119th)End debate nowYESYESPassed
2026-01-21H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-01-21H.R. 6945 (119th)Final passageYESYESPassed
2026-01-21H.R. 6945 (119th)Send back to committeeNONOFailed
2026-01-21H. Res. 1009 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESPassed
2026-01-21H. Res. 1009 (119th)End debate nowYESYESPassed

Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.

← PrevPage 4 / 12Next →