The whole site
Observatorio legislativo · LXVI Legislatura (2024–2027)
Cada iniciativa, punto de acuerdo y posicionamiento sobre los derechos de las personas LGBTTTIQANB+ en la LXVI Legislatura del Congreso del Estado de Oaxaca: quién lo presentó, a qué comisión llegó y cuánto tiempo lleva esperando.
Directorio del Congreso Official website (opens in another tab) Transparency 65/100 · 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 60 business days marks indicate when a bill starts to lag and when we consider it in the freezer. How we calculate it.
Showing 3 of 3 instruments that match your search.
In the freezer Bill · presented on July 7, 2026
Iniciativa con proyecto de Decreto de la Diputada Sandra Daniela Taurino Jiménez, integrante del Grupo Parlamentario del Partido Morena, por el que se reforma la fracción XXIX y se adiciona…
88 business days without a committee report
Approved Bill · presented on September 30, 2025
Iniciativa con Proyecto de Decreto de la Diputada Tania López López, integrante del Grupo Parlamentario del Partido Morena, por el que se reforma la fracción XV del artículo 3, el tercer…
Approved on September 8, 2026
Approved Punto de Acuerdo · presentada el 30 sep 2025
Proposición con Punto de Acuerdo de la Diputada Tania López López, integrante del Grupo Parlamentario del Partido Morena, por el que se exhorta respetuosamente al Subsecretario de…
Approved on November 25, 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.
5 - on f-up 1 Approved 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.
9 - on f-up 2 approved · 6 in the freezer
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.
0 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.
0 of 1 bill passed · 1 exhortation passed
0 laws approved · 1,3 achievement points
Submitting 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. 4 people in total, 4 with all their proposals frozen.
Sandra Daniela Taurino JiménezLGBTTTIQANB+ affirmative action
3 of 3 stalled proposals (2 bill and 1 exhortation)
All stalledSee 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tania López López Morena | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | 0 | 100/100 · Cash |
| Tania Caballero Navarro Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | 0 | |
| Biaani Palomec Enríquez PT | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | 0 | |
| Dulce Alejandra García Morlán Movimiento Ciudadano Only exhortations or statements: no bills |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 (0) | 0 | |
| Sandra Daniela Taurino Jiménez Morena All of their bills are in the freezer |
2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 (0) | 0 | |
| Dante Montaño Montero PT | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | 0 | |
| Melina Hernández Sosa Verde | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 |
Instruments in which the person appears as author or co-author.
Dulce Alejandra García Morlán Movimiento Ciudadano
4 instruments introduced
3 instruments introduced
Tania Caballero Navarro Morena
2 instruments introduced
Tania López López Morena
2 instruments introduced
1 instrument introduced
1 instrument introduced
Melina Hernández Sosa Verde
1 instrument 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 | 7 | 0 |
| Movimiento Ciudadano | 4 | 0 |
| PT | 2 | 0 |
| Verde | 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.
Sandra Daniela Taurino JiménezLGBTTTIQANB+ affirmative action Drives
Presentó 2 iniciativas de ley · 1 exhorto o posicionamiento · 6 pts
Dulce Alejandra García Morlán Supports
Presentó 4 exhortos o posicionamientos · 4 pts
Tania Caballero Navarro Drives
Presented 1 bill · 1 exhortation or positioning · 3 pts
Tania López López Drives
Presented 1 bill · 1 exhortation or positioning · 3 pts
Melina Hernández Sosa Drives
Introduced 1 bill · 2 pts
Biaani Palomec Enríquez Supports
Submitted 1 exhortation or positioning · 1 pts
Dante Montaño Montero Supports
Submitted 1 exhortation or positioning · 1 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.
Who holds a seat through affirmative action or identifies as part of the community, and whether their actions match that representation.
An affirmative action is a temporary measure that opens a space for a historically discriminated group to correct that inequality. We monitor that this space is used: whoever came in that way should champion or at least support proposals in favor of our rights. How we measure it.
They submitted or backed some proposal in favor, but accumulate signs of a sham of the affirmative action or of what they themselves submitted. We do not count it as agenda championed: the proposal may have been submitted only for appearances or left in the freezer on purpose.
Sandra Daniela Taurino Jiménez
3 in favor · 6 pts
It is flagged when a person who arrived through affirmative action accumulates 2 or more different signals. It is an alert to watch, not a verdict: several challenged people were upheld by the courts.
We never use stereotypes (marital status, appearance or gender expression) as a signal.
We only include those whom the electoral authority registered through affirmative action or who publicly identified themselves; we never assume it. “Voted against” appears only when a public source documents the vote, because most congresses do not publish their roll-call votes.
Affirmative actions stem from INE agreements and Electoral Tribunal rulings (INE/CG18/2021, INE/CG527/2023, SUP-JDC-338/2023, INE/CG625/2023) and their state equivalents. See the agreements · Is someone missing or is there an error?
Contamos los días hábiles (de lunes a viernes) desde que un instrumento se presenta hasta que la comisión lo dictamina. Señalamos rezago a los 30 y congeladora a los 60.
Legal basis: Ley Orgánica del Poder Legislativo, art. 66 fr. I: las comisiones permanentes resolverán los asuntos turnados en un plazo no mayor a 30 días hábiles. Reglamento Interior, art. 38: dictámenes a más tardar 30 días hábiles tras recibir el expediente; si no se puede, la comisión pide por escrito a la Mesa Directiva un nuevo plazo que no podrá exceder un término igual (hasta 30 días hábiles más, total 60); vencido, la Presidencia formula excitativa para dictaminar en 10 días hábiles. Art. 65 del Reglamento: los plazos en días son hábiles. Ambos textos con última reforma por Decreto 1539 aprobado el 7 de abril de 2026. See the law (opens in another tab)
Current text consulted: latest reform published on April 7, 2026.
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 business days or less since it was introduced and hasn’t been reported on yet.
More than 60 business 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.
