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 Senado de la República: 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 90 business days marks indicate when a bill starts to lag and when we consider it in the freezer. How we calculate it.
Showing 12 of 17 instrumentos que coinciden con tu búsqueda.
In the freezer Bill · presented on November 13, 2024
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma el artículo 1° de la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
516 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on February 6, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma el párrafo quinto del artículo 1 de la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
455 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on February 19, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma la denominación del Capítulo Primero del Título Tercero Bis y se adiciona un capítulo segundo denominado “Delitos de odio”, con la adición de los…
446 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on February 24, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma y adiciona la fracción IX del artículo 116 de la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
443 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on April 2, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma el artículo 132 de la Ley Federal del Trabajo.
416 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on April 30, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma el primer párrafo del artículo 4° de la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
396 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on May 21, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma y adiciona el artículo 4 de la Ley de Asistencia Social.
381 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on May 27, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforman los artículos 146, 147, 168, 172, 177, 216, 217, 218 y 294 del Código Civil Federal y el artículo 9 del Código de Comercio.
377 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on June 20, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma la fracción IV del artículo 84 de la Ley General de Población.
359 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on June 20, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma la fracción III del artículo 5 de la Ley General en materia de desaparición forzada de personas, desaparición cometida por particulares y del…
359 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on June 20, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma el párrafo segundo del artículo 3 y el artículo 26 de la Ley General de Alimentación Adecuada y Sostenible.
359 business days without a committee report
In the freezer Bill · presented on June 20, 2025
Proyecto de decreto por el que se reforma el párrafo quinto del artículo 1° de la Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
359 business days without a committee report
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.
44 - on f-up 28 aprobados · 16 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.
2 - on f-up 0 aprobados · 1 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.
28 of 32 bills approved
28 laws approved · 70 achievement points
Drives constitutional reforms or new lawsReyna Celeste Ascencio OrtegaAcción afirmativa LGBTTTIQANB+ · lesbiana
27 of 31 bills approved
27 laws approved · 67 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. 12 people en total, 11 con todas sus propuestas congeladas.
Julieta Andrea Ramírez Padilla
1 of 1 stalled proposal
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| María Martina Kantún Can Morena | 32 | 28 | 0 | 4 | 0 (0) | 0 | 86/100 · Efectiva |
| Reyna Celeste Ascencio Ortega Morena | 31 | 27 | 0 | 4 | 0 (0) | 0 | 87/100 · Efectiva |
| Luisa Cortés García Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 (0) | 0 | |
| Alberto Anaya Gutiérrez PT | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | 0 | |
| Ana Karen Hernández Aceves PT | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | 0 | |
| Araceli Saucedo Reyes Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Emmanuel Reyes Carmona Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Eugenio Segura Vázquez Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Geovanna del Carmen Bañuelos De la Torre PT | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | 0 | |
| José Manuel Cruz Castellanos Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Julieta Andrea Ramírez Padilla Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Karina Isabel Ruiz Ruiz Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Lizeth Sánchez García PT | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | 0 | |
| Yeidckol Polevnsky Gurwitz PT | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) | 0 |
Instruments in which the person appears as author or co-author.
María Martina Kantún Can Morena
32 instruments introduced
31 instruments introduced
Luisa Cortés García Morena
2 instruments introduced
1 instrument introduced
1 instrument introduced
Araceli Saucedo Reyes Morena
1 instrument introduced
Emmanuel Reyes Carmona Morena
1 instrument introduced
Eugenio Segura Vázquez Morena
1 instrument introduced
Sign-ons: legislators who signed in support of an instrument presented by someone else.
No sign-ons recorded.
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.
María Martina Kantún Can Drives
Presentó 32 iniciativas de ley · 81 pts
Reyna Celeste Ascencio OrtegaAcción afirmativa LGBTTTIQANB+ · lesbiana Drives
Presentó 31 iniciativas de ley · 77 pts
Luisa Cortés García Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 1 exhorto o posicionamiento · 3 pts
Araceli Saucedo Reyes Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 3 pts
Eugenio Segura Vázquez Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 3 pts
José Manuel Cruz Castellanos Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 3 pts
Julieta Andrea Ramírez Padilla Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 3 pts
Karina Isabel Ruiz Ruiz Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 3 pts
Emmanuel Reyes Carmona Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 2 pts
Alberto Anaya Gutiérrez Supports
Presentó 1 exhorto o posicionamiento · 1 pts
Ana Karen Hernández Aceves Supports
Presentó 1 exhorto o posicionamiento · 1 pts
Geovanna del Carmen Bañuelos De la Torre Supports
Presentó 1 exhorto o posicionamiento · 1 pts
Lizeth Sánchez García Supports
Presentó 1 exhorto o posicionamiento · 1 pts
Yeidckol Polevnsky Gurwitz Supports
Presentó 1 exhorto o posicionamiento · 1 pts
Sorted by severity, not just by quantity: each proposal against adds its weight (constitutional amendment or new law 3, amendment to a law 2, exhortation 1, position statement 0.5; half if they only signed in support). That is why a constitutional amendment against weighs more than several speeches.
1 propuesta en contra · 3 pts
1 × reforma constitucional o ley nueva
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 introduced bills in favor of our rights.
31 in favor · 77 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 90.
Legal basis: Reglamento del Senado de la República (texto vigente, última reforma DOF 06-12-2024), art. 212: "1. Las iniciativas y proyectos turnados a comisiones son dictaminados dentro de un plazo no mayor a treinta días hábiles contados a partir del siguiente al de la recepción del turno [...] 3. [...] las comisiones dictaminadoras pueden pedir al Presidente, mediante escrito fundado y motivado, la ampliación de los plazos [...] hasta por sesenta días hábiles, siendo posible sólo una prórroga otorgada [...] 4. [...] los días hábiles incluyen los recesos legislativos". El art. 212.2 permite a la Mesa otorgar un plazo mayor por trascendencia o complejidad, sin exceder 365 días naturales desde el turno (art. 212.5). Vencido el plazo, la Presidencia emite excitativa con un último plazo de 20 días hábiles (art. 214); vencidos plazos y prórrogas sin causa justificada precluye la facultad de la comisión y se turna a otra por 20 días hábiles improrrogables, tras lo cual la iniciativa se publica y se lista para discusión en el Pleno (art. 217). Al inicio de cada año de ejercicio, las iniciativas de senadores no dictaminadas del año anterior que no sean mantenidas por los grupos parlamentarios o juntas directivas se concluyen y se descargan de los turnos (art. 219.2.III). Las proposiciones con punto de acuerdo no dictaminadas en el periodo ordinario en que se presentaron se tienen por concluidas (art. 277.5). dias_ambar = 30 días hábiles (plazo ordinario); dias_congeladora = 30 + 60 días hábiles de prórroga única = 90. See the law (opens in another tab)
Current text consulted: latest reform published on December 6, 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 business days or less since it was introduced and hasn’t been reported on yet.
More than 90 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.
