Javascript is required to run this page
Phillip Scott

Phillip Scott

Phillip Scott has served in the House of Delegates since 2022.
Republican
Currently represents House of Delegates District 63

Voting Unity: Republican Caucus

Select Year:
Issue Filter:

How often does Phillip Scott vote with the party when at least two-thirds of other Republicans take the same position?

With Caucus

73%


Other

27%



  • 02/18/2025 - Senate: Agreed to by Senate with substitute
    02/19/2025 - House: Senate substitute agreed to by House

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/04/2025 - House: Engrossed by House - committee substitute
    02/04/2025 - House: Agreed to by House (54-Y 44-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

Bill Details
  • 02/03/2025 - House: Engrossed by House
    02/03/2025 - House: Agreed to by House (57-Y 39-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

Bill Details
  • 02/03/2025 - House: Engrossed by House
    02/03/2025 - House: Agreed to by House (64-Y 31-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

Bill Details
  • 02/03/2025 - House: Engrossed by House - committee substitute
    02/03/2025 - House: Agreed to by House (60-Y 37-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

Bill Details
  • 02/20/2025 - Senate: Agreed to by Senate with amendment by voice vote
    02/20/2025 - House: Senate Amendment agreed to by House (50-Y 45-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/03/2025 - House: Engrossed by House
    02/03/2025 - House: Agreed to by House (54-Y 43-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

Bill Details
  • 02/03/2025 - House: Engrossed by House - committee substitute
    02/04/2025 - House: Read third time and passed House (95-Y 4-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    Yes

Bill Details
  • 02/03/2025 - House: Printed as engrossed 25105084D-EH1
    02/04/2025 - House: Read third time and passed House (61-Y 38-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

Bill Details
  • 02/03/2025 - House: Engrossed by House - committee substitute
    02/04/2025 - House: Read third time and passed House (52-Y 47-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

Bill Details
  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 4-1.01 #1h agreed to (50-Y 47-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 4-2.01 #1h agreed to (51-Y 45-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 489.30 #1h agreed to (51-Y 45-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item C-32.10 #1h agreed to (51-Y 46-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 471 #4h agreed to (51-Y 46-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 489.30 #1h agreed to (51-Y 45-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 471 #3h agreed to (49-Y 47-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 471 #4h agreed to (51-Y 46-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 394 #2h agreed to (50-Y 46-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 394 #3h agreed to (53-Y 43-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 377 #1h agreed to (48-Y 47-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 390 #1h agreed to (51-Y 45-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 277 #4h agreed to (51-Y 45-N 1-A)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 288 #1h agreed to (52-Y 44-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 277 #1h agreed to (97-Y 0-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 277 #4h agreed to (51-Y 45-N 1-A)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 236 #2h agreed to (88-Y 9-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 255 #1h agreed to (51-Y 45-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 236 #1h agreed to (80-Y 16-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 236 #2h agreed to (88-Y 9-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    Yes

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 103 #1h agreed to (50-Y 45-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 120 #1h agreed to (51-Y 45-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 102 #12h agreed to (97-Y 0-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 103 #1h agreed to (50-Y 45-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 86 #3h agreed to (62-Y 32-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 101 #5h agreed to (94-Y 3-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    Yes

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 51 #1h agreed to (50-Y 47-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 86 #3h agreed to (62-Y 32-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 35 #1h agreed to (97-Y 0-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 40 #2h agreed to (51-Y 46-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/06/2025 - House: Uncontested Committee amendments agreed to (97-Y 0-N)
    02/06/2025 - House: Contested committee amendment Item 7 #1h agreed to (53-Y 44-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

Bill Details
  • 04/02/2025 - House: House rejected Governor's recommendation (11-Y 85-N)
    04/02/2025 - House: Motion to pass in enrolled form rejected (51-Y 44-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 03/24/2025 - Governor's Recommendation
    04/02/2025 - House: House rejected Governor's recommendation (11-Y 85-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 02/21/2025 - House: Conference substitute printed 25107870D-H1
    02/22/2025 - House: Conference report agreed to by House (55-Y 44-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

  • 01/22/2025 - House: Printed as engrossed 25102219D-E
    01/23/2025 - House: Read third time and passed House (57-Y 40-N)

    Phillip Scott:
    No

Bill Details

VPAP's unity score should not be interpreted as a partisan litmus test. For instance, Republicans who more often split from caucus does not necessarily mean they are less conservative than peers. It could mean they are more conservative. A nuanced reading of bills involved is needed to reach any conclusions.