Observatorio legislativo · LXVI Legislatura (Legislatura 66) (2024–2027)
Cada iniciativa, punto de acuerdo y posicionamiento sobre los derechos de las personas LGBTTTIQANB+ en la LXVI Legislatura (Legislatura 66) del Congreso del Estado de Tamaulipas: 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 45 and 60 calendar days marks indicate when a bill starts to lag and when we consider it in the freezer. How we calculate it.
Showing 1 of 1 instrumento que coinciden con tu búsqueda.
In the freezer Bill · presented on June 10, 2025
De Decreto por el cual se reforma y adicionan diversas disposiciones del Código Civil para el Estado de Tamaulipas para el reconocimiento de la identidad autopercibida.
513 days without a 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.
15 - on f-up 8 aprobados · 6 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 2 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.
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.
Lucero Deosdady Martínez López
4 de 7 propuestas de ley aprobadas · 1 exhorto aprobado
4 laws approved · 11,8 achievement points
Drives constitutional reforms or new laws1 de 1 propuesta de ley aprobada
1 ley aprobada · 3 achievement points
Drives constitutional reforms or new lawsHumberto Armando Prieto Herrera
1 de 1 propuesta de ley aprobada
1 ley aprobada · 2 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. 2 people en total, 2 con todas sus propuestas congeladas.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lucero Deosdady Martínez López Morena | 7 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 (1) | 0 | 69/100 · Avanza |
| Humberto Armando Prieto Herrera Morena | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 (0) | 0 | 100/100 · Efectiva |
| Marcelo Abundiz Ramírez Morena | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 (0) | 0 | 100/100 · Efectiva |
| Silvia Isabel Chávez Garay Morena | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 (0) | 0 | 100/100 · Efectiva |
| Guillermina Magaly Deandar Robinson Morena | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 | 50/100 · Avanza |
| Francisca Castro Armenta Morena | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | 0 | 100/100 · Efectiva |
| Cynthia Lizabeth Jaime Castillo Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 | |
| Sergio Arturo Ojeda Castillo Morena | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 (0) | 0 |
Instruments in which the person appears as author or co-author.
8 instruments introduced
2 instruments introduced
1 instrument introduced
Francisca Castro Armenta Morena
1 instrument introduced
Gabriela Regalado Fuentes Morena
1 instrument introduced
1 instrument introduced
Marcelo Abundiz Ramírez Morena
1 instrument introduced
Sergio Arturo Ojeda Castillo Morena
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 | 17 | 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.
Lucero Deosdady Martínez López Drives
Presentó 7 iniciativas de ley · 1 exhorto o posicionamiento · 17 pts
Guillermina Magaly Deandar Robinson Drives
Presentó 2 iniciativas de ley · 4 pts
Marcelo Abundiz Ramírez Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 3 pts
Cynthia Lizabeth Jaime Castillo Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 2 pts
Humberto Armando Prieto Herrera Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 2 pts
Sergio Arturo Ojeda Castillo Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 2 pts
Silvia Isabel Chávez Garay Drives
Presentó 1 iniciativa de ley · 2 pts
Francisca Castro Armenta 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 · 2 pts
1 × reforma a una ley
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 45 and the freezer at 60.
Legal basis: Ley sobre la Organización y Funcionamiento Internos del Congreso del Estado Libre y Soberano de Tamaulipas, art. 45, numeral 1: toda comisión deberá presentar el dictamen de los asuntos a su cargo dentro de los cuarenta y cinco días siguientes a la fecha en que los haya recibido (la ley no precisa si son hábiles o naturales); numeral 3: el Pleno puede autorizar la ampliación del plazo a solicitud fundada de la comisión, sin tope máximo. Art. 96: vencido el plazo, a solicitud de cualquier integrante del Pleno, la Presidencia de la Mesa Directiva exhorta a la comisión a dictaminar en un periodo no mayor a 15 días naturales y, transcurrido éste, puede returnar el expediente a otra comisión (45 + 15 = 60 días). Texto vigente con última reforma aplicada en P.O. Edición Vespertina No. 109 del 10 de septiembre de 2026 (Decreto 66-1389). No existe un Reglamento interior del Congreso separado en el catálogo de legislación vigente. See the law (opens in another tab)
Current text consulted: latest reform published on September 10, 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 45 calendar days or less since it was introduced and hasn’t been reported on yet.
More than 60 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.
