Javascript is required to run this page
Dave Suetterlein

Dave Suetterlein

Dave Suetterlein has served in the State Senate since 2016.
Republican
Currently represents State Senate District 4

Voting Unity: Republican Caucus

Select Year:
Issue Filter:

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

With Caucus
Other

  • 03/04/2026 - Governor's recommendation received by Senate
    03/05/2026 - Senate: Senate concurred in Governor's recommendation (22-Y 17-N 0-A)

    Dave Suetterlein:
    Yes

Bill Details
  • 03/11/2026 - House: House Conferees: Reaser, Cohen, Tata
    03/13/2026 - Senate: Conference report agreed to by Senate (25-Y 14-N 0-A)

    Dave Suetterlein:
    Yes

Bill Details
  • 02/02/2026 - Senate: Engrossed by Senate (Voice Vote)
    02/03/2026 - Senate: Read third time and passed Senate (30-Y 9-N 0-A)

    Dave Suetterlein:
    No

Bill Details
  • 02/04/2026 - Senate: Engrossed by Senate as amended (Voice Vote)
    02/05/2026 - Senate: Read third time and passed Senate (34-Y 6-N 0-A)

    Dave Suetterlein:
    No

Bill Details
  • 03/13/2026 - Conference Report released
    03/13/2026 - Senate: Conference report agreed to by Senate (24-Y 15-N 0-A)

    Dave Suetterlein:
    Yes

  • 02/12/2026 - Senate: Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute (Voice Vote)
    02/13/2026 - Senate: Read third time and passed Senate (22-Y 16-N 0-A)

    Dave Suetterlein:
    Yes

Bill Details
  • 03/03/2026 - House: Passed House with substitute (64-Y 34-N 0-A)
    03/05/2026 - Senate: House substitute agreed to by Senate (23-Y 16-N 0-A)

    Dave Suetterlein:
    Yes

  • 02/09/2026 - Senate: Engrossed by Senate (Voice Vote)
    02/10/2026 - Senate: Read third time and passed Senate (23-Y 17-N 0-A)

    Dave Suetterlein:
    Yes

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.