Compare how John Faulkner and Rachel Siewert voted on reproductive bodily autonomy

Now this is where it gets a bit tricky… Two people might vote the same way on votes they both attended, so their votes are 100% in agreement. They might also have voted in a way we’d describe differently when looking at all of one person's votes. If the other person didn’t or couldn’t have attended those votes we leave those out of the comparison. Because that just wouldn’t be fair now, would it?

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for reproductive bodily autonomy” which either John Faulkner or Rachel Siewert could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of John Faulkner and Rachel Siewert on this policy. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".

Division John Faulkner Rachel Siewert Supporters vote
no votes listed

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for reproductive bodily autonomy” which either John Faulkner or Rachel Siewert could have attended. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".

Division John Faulkner Rachel Siewert Supporters vote

16th Oct 2019 – Senate Motions - Abortion - Congratulate NSW

- Yes Yes

14th Feb 2018, 4:41 PM – Senate Motions - Abortion - Alternatives and counselling

- No No

7th Feb 2018, 3:56 PM – Senate Motions - Reproductive Health Services - Availability of abortion services

- Yes Yes

9th Feb 2006, 4:49 PM – Senate Therapeutic Goods Amendment (Repeal of Ministerial Responsibility for Approval of Ru486) Bill 2005 - Third Reading - Read a third time

Yes Yes Yes

9th Feb 2006, 12:54 PM – Senate Therapeutic Goods Amendment (Repeal of Ministerial Responsibility for Approval of Ru486) Bill 2005 - Second Reading - Read a second time

Yes Yes Yes