Observatorio legislativo · LXX Legislatura (2024–2027)
Cada iniciativa, punto de acuerdo y posicionamiento sobre los derechos de las personas LGBTTTIQANB+ en la LXX Legislatura del Congreso del Estado de Durango: quién lo presentó, a qué comisión llegó y cuánto tiempo lleva esperando.
Directorio del Congreso Official website (opens in another tab) Transparency 75/100 · Medium Whole country
This is the traffic light today
Records last updated: October 17, 2026
Each instrument with the time it has been in Congress. The 30 and 45 calendar days marks indicate when a bill starts to lag and when we consider it in the freezer. How we calculate it.
Showing 7 of 7 instrumentos que coinciden con tu búsqueda.
In the freezer Bill · presented on September 17, 2024
Iniciativa presentada por las y los diputados integrantes de la Coalición Parlamentaria “Cuarta Transformación”, que contiene reformas y adiciones al Código Civil del Estado de Durango…
779 days without a report
In the freezer Bill · presented on October 29, 2024
Iniciativa presentada por las y los diputados integrantes de la Coalición Parlamentaria “Cuarta Transformación”, por el que se adiciona el artículo 147 Ter del Código Penal del Estado Libre…
737 days without a report
In the freezer Bill · presented on September 18, 2025
Iniciativa presentada por las y los diputados integrantes de la Coalición Parlamentaria “Cuarta Transformación”, por la que se adicionan las fracciones X y XI al artículo 439 del Código…
413 days without a report
In process Bill · presented on October 6, 2026
Iniciativa presentada por las y los diputados integrantes de la Coalición Parlamentaria “Cuarta Transformación”, que contiene reformas y adiciones a diversas disposiciones al Código Penal…
30 days without a report
In process Bill · presented on October 6, 2026
Iniciativa presentada por las y los diputados integrantes de la Coalición Parlamentaria “Cuarta Transformación”, que contiene reformas y adiciones al Código Civil del Estado de Durango y al…
30 days without a report
Approved Bill · presented on November 20, 2024
Iniciativa presentada por el Diputado Martín Vivanco Lira, representante del Partido Movimiento Ciudadano, que contiene reformas al Código Penal para el Estado de Durango y adiciones a la…
Approved on December 9, 2025
Approved Bill · presented on June 10, 2025
Iniciativa presentada por las y los diputados integrantes de la Coalición Parlamentaria “Cuarta Transformación”, por la que se adiciona el Capítulo II TER denominado “Esfuerzos para…
Approved on November 6, 2025
Presenting is not the same as achieving. An approved reform changes the law; an exhortation only asks. That is why we separate each type of instrument and evaluate results, not just quantity. We count only what this observatory follows, not all of Congress’s activity.
8 - on f-up 3 aprobados · 3 in the freezer
They propose creating or changing a law, a code or the Constitution. If they are passed and published, they bind every authority. It’s the instrument with the greatest reach and the hardest to push through: it needs a committee report and a vote of the Plenary.
0 - on f-up 0 aprobados
They ask an authority to do something or set out a position of the Congress. They don’t change any law or bind anyone legally: their force is political. They tend to pass more easily, sometimes the same day.
1 being tracked
Statements from the floor or in the media. They put a position on record, but they aren’t voted on and have no legal effect.
Legislative work or simulation? Presenting many exhortations and position statements without a single bill, or presenting bills and leaving them in the freezer, gives visibility but does not change rights. Pushing a bill forward is also the responsibility of whoever presents it: lobbying the committee, asking for a report and securing the votes. That is why we mark these signs in the evaluation.
Presenting a proposal is easy; getting it approved takes work: convincing the committee, asking for it to be reviewed and securing the votes.
This is how it is ranked: 1) more laws passed; 2) if tied, more achievement points (each proposal adds its weight according to its outcome: an approved new law or constitutional amendment is worth 3, an approved amendment 2, an approved exhortation 1; those that move forward add a part); 3) if they are still tied, the better rating. The rating (from 0 to 100) measures effectiveness: how well what they submitted fared, on average.
2 of 7 bills approved
2 laws approved · 6,4 achievement points
Drives constitutional reforms or new lawsCynthia Montserrat Hernández Quiñones
2 of 7 bills approved
2 laws approved · 6,4 achievement points
Drives constitutional reforms or new lawsDelia Leticia Enríquez Arriaga
2 of 7 bills approved
2 laws approved · 6,4 achievement points
Drives constitutional reforms or new laws2 of 7 bills approved
2 laws approved · 6,4 achievement points
Drives constitutional reforms or new laws2 of 7 bills approved
2 laws approved · 6,4 achievement points
Drives constitutional reforms or new laws2 of 7 bills approved
2 laws approved · 6,4 achievement points
Drives constitutional reforms or new lawsSubmitting is not enough: you also have to lobby the committee and get the votes. Here are those who have proposals that passed the legal deadline without review and none approved, and those who submitted proposals that look like a sham. Letting something freeze is not the same as being against: that is why they are in yellow, except for shams, which are flagged separately. Whoever fakes support does not appear among the best-rated people. Number 1 is the one with the most frozen proposals. 2 people en total, 1 con todas sus propuestas congeladas.
3 of 5 stalled proposals
See the full methodology, with examples and academic sources
1. Not all proposals are worth the same. An amendment to the Constitution or a new law weighs 3; an amendment to a law or code, 2; an exhortation or point of agreement, 1; and a position statement, 0.5. It is an adaptation of the Multidimensional Index of Significance (Bárcena, Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, 2019), which distinguishes high-impact proposals from symbolic ones.
2. What happened to each one matters. Approved adds 100; reviewed by the committee, 60; on time, 35; delayed, 15; rejected, 5; and frozen, 0. The rating is the average, giving each proposal the weight of its significance. Position statements are not voted on, so they are not included in the rating.
3. Colors. Green: achieves results. Blue: their proposals move forward. Yellow: submitted, but their proposals are frozen or stalled (a lack of push, not necessarily bad faith). Red: submitted or backed proposals against of LGBTTTIQANB+ rights. Gray: stayed silent, without submitting or backing anything.
4. Allies who drive and allies who support. Submitting a proposal is worth twice as much as signing it in support. Those who submit bills champion the agenda; those who only sign, submit exhortations or take a position support it.
70 or more: effective · 45 to 69: moving forward · 25 to 44: waiting · less than 25: submitted, no progress. We only count proposals on LGBTTTIQANB+ rights followed by this observatory, not all their legislative work. We measure progress in Congress; whether a law is then fulfilled in people’s lives requires an impact evaluation ex post like the one proposed by Transparencia Mexicana (2023).
First those who got their bills approved; then, by rating. Only instruments the person presented count (not sign-ons). “Approved” means the Plenary voted for it by majority or it has already been published.
| Person | Bills | Approved for them | Reports | Stalled | Exhortations | Stat. | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blasa Doralia Campos Rosas Morena | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 (0) | 0 | 100/100 · Efectiva |
| Delia Leticia Enríquez Arriaga Morena | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 1 | |
| Bernabé Aguilar Carrillo Morena | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Cynthia Montserrat Hernández Quiñones Morena | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Georgina Solorio García Morena | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Héctor Herrera Núñez Morena | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| José Osbaldo Santillán Gómez Verde | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Nadia Monserrat Milán Ramírez Morena | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Octavio Ulises Adame de la Fuente Morena | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Otniel García Navarro Morena | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Sandra Lilia Amaya Rosales Morena | 7 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Martín Vivanco Lira Movimiento Ciudadano | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 (0) | 0 | 100/100 · Efectiva |
| Flora Isela Leal Méndez Morena Most of their bills are stalled |
5 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Alberto Alejandro Mata Valadez Morena All of their bills are in the freezer |
3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 (0) | 0 |
Instruments in which the person appears as author or co-author.
8 instruments introduced
Bernabé Aguilar Carrillo Morena
7 instruments introduced
7 instruments introduced
Georgina Solorio García Morena
7 instruments introduced
Héctor Herrera Núñez Morena
7 instruments introduced
7 instruments introduced
7 instruments introduced
7 instruments introduced
Sign-ons: legislators who signed in support of an instrument presented by someone else.
No sign-ons recorded.
Each instrument counts once for each party of its authors and once for each party that signed on. The same instrument can add to several parties.
| Party | Introduced | Endorsements |
|---|---|---|
| Morena | 8 | 0 |
| Verde | 7 | 0 |
| Movimiento Ciudadano | 1 | 0 |
Who has put their name in favor of our rights in this congress, and who against.
Drives: introduced bills in favor. Supports: submitted exhortations or position statements, or spoke out in favor publicly. Signed without speaking out: signed in support, but did not submit anything or speak out in favor publicly; signing or voting is not enough to be an ally. Not an ally: submitted or backed at least one proposal against, or spoke out against publicly. Fakes support: signed or submitted in favor, but speaks out against publicly. Silence: in office, without introducing or backing any proposal on these rights.
Ranked by points: each proposal in favor adds its weight (3, 2, 1 or 0.5 depending on its scope) and is worth half if they only signed it in support.
Delia Leticia Enríquez Arriaga Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 1 exhorto o posicionamiento · 15,5 pts
Bernabé Aguilar Carrillo Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 15 pts
Cynthia Montserrat Hernández Quiñones Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 15 pts
Georgina Solorio García Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 15 pts
Héctor Herrera Núñez Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 15 pts
José Osbaldo Santillán Gómez Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 15 pts
Nadia Monserrat Milán Ramírez Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 15 pts
Octavio Ulises Adame de la Fuente Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 15 pts
Otniel García Navarro Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 15 pts
Sandra Lilia Amaya Rosales Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 15 pts
Flora Isela Leal Méndez Drives
Presentó 5 iniciativas de ley · 10 pts
Alberto Alejandro Mata Valadez Drives
Presentó 3 iniciativas de ley · 6 pts
Blasa Doralia Campos Rosas Drives
Presentó 2 iniciativas de ley · 5 pts
Martín Vivanco Lira Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 2 pts
We have not recorded proposals against rights in what we track.
They neither submitted nor signed in support of any proposal, not even on difficult issues. Silence is also a position.
“No party”: deputies with no party or parliamentary group, or with no party in the official document. Independent candidacies are counted separately. Tap a party to see its profile.
We only count proposals on LGBTTTIQANB+ rights followed by this observatory and the support signatures recorded on them; Plenary votes are not included.
We count the calendar days from when an instrument is presented until the committee reports on it. We flag a lag at 30 and the freezer at 45.
Legal basis: Ley Orgánica del Congreso del Estado de Durango, art. 103: la comisión rendirá sus dictámenes al Pleno a más tardar 30 días después del turno; con aprobación de la propia comisión puede prorrogarse 15 días más, avisando al Presidente de la Mesa Directiva (30 + 15 = 45 días). El artículo dice solo “días”; en cambio, para otros plazos la ley sí especifica “días hábiles”. Vencido el plazo procede la excitativa, y al final de cada segundo periodo ordinario se declara la caducidad de las iniciativas sin trabajo ni prórroga. Última reforma de la ley: Dec. 075, P.O. 99 Bis del 12 de diciembre de 2024. See the law (opens in another tab)
Current text consulted: latest reform published on December 12, 2024.
We record each piece of data from the Gazette and Congress’s official documents. If you find an error, write to us. How much does each congress publish? See the transparency index.
The plenary approved it or it was already published.
The committee has already issued its report; the Plenary still has to vote or the process has to conclude.
It has 30 calendar days or less since it was introduced and hasn’t been reported on yet.
More than 45 calendar days without a committee report: it is stalled.
The process ended without approval.
Find out who sits on each committee, what bills they have pending and how to contact them.
