120 Champions and Defenders of Children: The Lawmakers Who Show Up for Kids

Our Scorecard reveals gender and regional patterns that may help explain why child well-being varies so much from state to state.

Every year, the First Focus Campaign for Children’s (FFCC) Legislative Scorecard tries to answer a simple question that Washington too often dodges: When it mattered, who actually showed up for children?

That’s why we produce the FFCC Legislative Scorecard each year. First, it’s a measurement tool. But it’s also serves as a very public thank you to the top members of Congress for children.

When House and Senate members prioritize children – especially in a town where big money and special interests get the spotlight – we should name and honor those who step up, letting them know that their work matters and is deeply appreciated.

This year’s Scorecard recognizes 120 Champions and Defenders of Children, including 40 senators and 80 representatives, who stood up to put kids at the forefront of their work. In a Congress where children are often treated like an afterthought or targeted for harm, these members sought to make the needs and best interests of children a priority. They treated children’s health, nutrition, safety, and opportunity as issues worth fighting for rather than “nice-to-have” talking points.

That’s the spirit of our Legislative Scorecard: accountability and gratitude.

With respect to accountability, it’s designed to thank those who are leading for children, to encourage others to do more, and to insist that every member of Congress take their obligation to the next generation seriously.

This certainly isn’t about naïve optimism, as children’s challenges are too real for that. But gratitude for the leaders who prove that a different kind of politics is possible: a politics that measures success by whether children can breathe easier, learn more, go to bed fed, and grow up with a fair shot.

The Scorecard is also about transparency. FFCC staff identified 156 bills for which we either took a formal position of support or opposition. The good news is that we supported 128 of those bills, which means 82% were favorable to children.

There were also 15 votes in Congress that were child-centered that we identified and 12 of those votes would have been favorable to kids. The horrible news is that kids lost all 15 recorded votes that we scored.

To House and Senate leaders, we must demand that they bring to the floor and support more of the 128 bills that benefit children rather than the minority of bills that harm kids.

The Scorecard does more than just provide a list of Champions and Defenders of Children or the 171 bills and votes that we “scored.” It also maps where Champions and Defenders come from and identifies important patterns that deserve attention.

For example, women in Congress were 2.9 times more likely to be Champions or Defenders, and that matters not as a “fun fact,” but as a clue about how caregiving, lived experience, and representation shape governing priorities.

Just as important: the Scorecard points to ways that men could better support children. The creation of the Congressional Dads Caucus is an encouraging development because it signals something children urgently need: more men in Congress stepping up – openly, consistently, and proudly – for kids. As a governing commitment, many Dads Caucus members are showing what that looks like, and we need more of them.

When the Champions and Defenders are mapped, there are clear regional differences in how likely it is that members are to show up for kids. Those differences appear to track what families already know:

• Child well-being varies dramatically from state to state

• Policy matters

• States that have made the well-being of children a priority are more likely to send Champions and Defenders of children to Congress

So consider this an invitation to find your members of Congress in the report and to thank them if they are a Champion or Defender of children. Encourage them to keep leading. And if they are not, urge them to take more public steps on behalf of children, which include sponsoring, cosponsoring, and voting for bills that benefit children.

How It Works: A Child-Focused “Balls and Strikes” Point System, Not a Generic Ideology Score

Unlike other scorecards that include child-related votes as a subset of larger agendas, the FFCC Scorecard is intentionally narrower and more child-centered. It uses a points system that seeks to do nothing more than “call balls and strikes.”

The report is non-partisan, as members earn points for introducing, sponsoring, or cosponsoring legislation that matters to children and for casting key votes in the “best interests of children.” Members lose points for introducing, sponsoring, or supporting legislation that would harm kids.

Just as important: FFCC scores only votes and legislation that primarily or disproportionately impact children, which is why this scorecard stands apart as a uniquely child-focused measure of congressional action. The Scorecard also recognizes that real decisions get made long before the final vote, so it uses a more in-depth framework than simply tallying floor outcomes.

Children are often invisible in the political process. The Legislative Scorecard seeks to identify moments when lawmakers demonstrate public support or opposition to child well-being.

Who Gets Identified and Recognized

This year’s Scorecard honors 120 lawmakers (60 Champions and 60 Defenders, 40 senators and 80 House members) who “repeatedly used their voices, votes, and leadership” to advance kids’ best interests across the full array of children’s issues: health, early childhood, development, nutrition, child poverty, education, child welfare, safety, and international policy.

As an example, we would highlight Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), who appears across key child- and family-relevant priorities in this Scorecard’s pages, including major Child Tax Credit, child care, and anti-poverty policy efforts. That’s the kind of leadership kids need: consistent, visible, and woven into multiple policy lanes – not treated as an occasional issue.

The Scorecard does draw a small distinction:

• Champions for Children consistently pursue policies that put children first across a broad range of issues. If we were assigned a grade, these members would get a A+.

• Defenders of Children repeatedly step forward to protect children from harm and to support their well-being when it mattered most. If we were to assign a grade, these members would get an A or A-.

Children desperately need more of these leaders: lawmakers who build, expand, invest, and hold the line when kids are targeted or ignored.

To be clear, many members of Congress not identified in the report also take meaningful actions for kids, including behind-the-scenes work that is harder to score. We see their efforts and are grateful to them.

But the report also identifies the disturbing reality that narrow majorities in the House and Senate cast votes in opposition to the needs of children time and time again in 2025.

That must change.

Women Continue to Carry a Disproportionate Share of the Load in Congress for Kids

One of the most striking findings in this year’s Legislative Scorecard is the continuing gender divide in who becomes a Champion or Defender of Children.

Women in Congress were 2.9 times more likely than men to stand as Champions or Defenders for children in 2025. And more than 42% of women in Congress were named Champions or Defenders. Even more remarkable: women made up 53.3% of the 120 Champions and Defenders. despite representing just 28.2% of Congress.

And because this post is about gratitude, it’s important to highlight that many of these women in Congress are not merely “voting the right way,” but they are doing the unglamorous, persistent work of keeping children’s needs on the agenda.

Many women in Congress, such as Ranking Members of the Appropriations Committees Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and Patty Murray (D-WA), demonstrate unrelenting support for children – week after week, hearing after hearing, markup after markup – when the powers that be would prefer to push kids into the shadows. Beyond their roles on the Appropriations Committee, Rep. DeLauro and Sen. Murray are leaders on top bills of importance to children on the issues of the Child Tax Credit and child care, respectively.

Moreover, lawmakers in the Congressional Mamas’ Caucus, chaired by Rep. Rasida Tlaib (D-MI), were more likely to put children first than even other high-performing women. Women in the Mamas’ Caucus were 2.3 times more likely to be Champions/Defenders than women not in the caucus.

Why the Dads Caucus Matters So Much and Needs More Men to Join It

In contrast, only 14.5% of men in Congress were named Champions or Defenders. But of that group, the report finds that Congressional Dads Caucus members in the House were 3.8 times more likely to be a Champions/Defenders than men not in the caucus.

That is why the creation of the Dads Caucus by Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-CA) is so important. It provides dads a focus and pathway to step up to the plate for children in ways other male lawmakers do not. The data suggests that when organize around fatherhood as an identity, children stop being “soft” or “nice” issues and start becoming a priority.

Kids don’t need men in Congress to be perfect, but they need them to be present. Children need them to be supportive and consistent. They need them to see children’s policy as part of their core job function because it is.

The Scorecard puts it simply:

Children need more legislators who make children a priority in Congress.

The Mapping Shows Us Where Kids Have Their Strongest Allies – and Where They Don’t

Once you start mapping the Champions and Defenders, a bigger story emerges: children’s political support is not evenly distributed across the country. In some regions, showing up for kids is comparatively common. In others, it’s the exception.

And that matters, because a child’s zip code should not determine whether their members of Congress treat them as a priority – but too often, it does.

According to the Scorecard, the share of each region’s delegation recognized as Champions or Defenders looks like this:

• Northeast: 42.1% (45 of the 107 members from Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Delaware)

• West: 29.7% (27 of 91 members from Alaska, Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Nevada)

• Midwest: 21.4% (21 of 98 members from Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Missouri)

• Southeast: 11.9% (16 of 139 members from Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas)

• Southwest/Plains: 10.5% (11 of 104 members from Arizona, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas) and Plains region (Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota)

That’s a striking spread. The difference between 42.1% and 10.5% isn’t a nuance – it’s a different political reality for children.

Considering that the Southwest has the fastest-growing population of children in the country, the low level of support from their lawmakers is a potential long-term disaster for the nation.

Beyond these regional differences, another finding in the Scorecard is that states with a higher level of child well-being tend to have a higher share of federal lawmakers who qualify as Champions or Defenders of Children.

Using the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s KIDS COUNT 2025 child well-being index, the Scorecard shows a clear step-down pattern: the higher ranking states have more Champions/Defenders, and the share declines as states fare worse in terms of child well-being.

Here are the numbers and the map:

• “Best” tier (12 states): 33.7% of federal policymakers were Champions/Defenders (30 of 89).

• “Better” tier (13 states): 26.5% (30 of 113).

• “Worse” tier (13 states): 20.7% (44 of 213).

• “Worst” tier (12 states): just 13.3% (16 of 120).

We should not overstate the findings, as this isn’t a randomized experiment. But it would be a mistake to shrug this off as meaningless. The Scorecard is pointing to something child advocates and families experience every day: politics is part of the ecosystem that determines whether children thrive.

So which way does the arrow point?

1) Culture shapes who gets elected

In some states, there’s a stronger public expectation that kids are everyone’s responsibility – not just parents’. Those expectations shape what candidates run on, what voters reward, and what “counts” as leadership. Over time, that culture can produce more Champions and Defenders.

2) Policymakers shape what becomes normal for kids

The reverse is also true. When leaders repeatedly choose to invest in children’s health coverage, nutrition, education, early learning, child care, and safety, that becomes the scaffolding of better outcomes. And once a state builds stronger systems for kids, it becomes an expectation for the next generation of leaders and voters to defend and protect them.

We would suggest this is a quintessential feedback loop: communities that prioritize children elect leaders who act like it, and leaders who prioritize children help build communities where kids do better.

And it also reflects what everyone knows: policy and investments in children matter.

What We Need To Do: Reward Legislators Who Show Up for Kids and Raise Expectations for Everyone Else

The Scorecard’s results bring us back to why we go to the extreme trouble or tracking the bills and votes, assign the points, and publish the findings in the first place: not just to analyze patterns, but to thank the people helping move kids’ lives in the right direction and create the political permission structure for many more members of Congress to join them.

If children had a vote, if toddlers had a PAC, if fourth-graders could flood Capitol Hill with lobbyists and campaign checks, we probably wouldn’t need a Scorecard to remind Congress that kids deserve attention.

But children don’t have those tools. We create and use the tools we do have.

This is why recognizing Champions and Defenders matters: public gratitude is a form of political power. It tells lawmakers that showing up for kids isn’t invisible. It tells staff that child-focused work is valued. And it signals to other members, especially those who haven’t made children a priority yet, that there is respect, credibility, and momentum on the side of putting kids first.

What You Can Do

Take five minutes today to look up your Representative and Senators.

• If they’re named a Champion or Defender of Children: Call their office and say thank you. Post a note on social media. Send an email. Mention it at a town hall. Public reinforcement matters because it creates the incentive structure that children can’t create for themselves.

• If they’re not on the list: Don’t assume they don’t care—assume they need to hear that you do.

What “Thanks” Really Does

Gratitude isn’t softness. It’s strategy.

When members take political risk for kids, when they hold the line against cuts, when they push for bigger investments, or when they lead on issues that don’t come with a powerful lobby, they need to know someone noticed. In the backrooms and bars in D.C., kids can’t be present to push for their needs, concerns, and best interests, so we must be their voices.

What Congress Needs to Hear Going Forward

If there’s a throughline in the Scorecard’s gender patterns, caucus patterns, and regional maps, it’s this: children do better when leaders treat them as a priority on purpose.

So let’s make “showing up for kids” contagious:

• Celebrate the Champions and Defenders.

• Encourage more men to follow the example of the Dads Caucus members who are stepping up.

• Build expectations in every region that children deserve champions – everywhere, not just in a handful of states.

For example, Texas ranks a pathetic 44^th in child well-being, but only 3 of its 39 members (just 7.7%) are Champions/Defenders. Thanks to Reps. Joaquin Castro (also a leader in the Dads Caucus), Lloyd Doggett, and Veronica Escobar, but 7 of their fellow delegation members rank in the bottom 10% of the entire House (including the lowest-scoring House member, Rep. Randy Weber).

Overall, Texas needs to do better by its children.

In contrast, Pennsylvania ranks 20^th in the nation in child well-being, and 6 of its 19 members (31.6%) are Champions/Defenders in the report. The members to whom we are grateful include bipartisan Reps. Brendan Boyle, Dwight Evans, Brian Fitzpatrick (the highest scoring Republican for several years running), Mary Gay Scanlon, Madeleine Dean, and Summer Lee. Just 1 Pennsylvania member scored in the bottom 10% of Congress.

In sharp contrast, Minnesota ranks 5^th in the nation in child well-being, and half of its delegation (5 out of 10) are identified as Champions/Defenders. Again, thanks to Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith and Reps. Angie Craig, Betty McCollum, and Ilhan Omar. In contrast, none of Minnesota’s members rank in the bottom 10%.

Children desperately need more Champions/Defenders like those identified in the FFCC Legislative Scorecard. We publish this because kids can’t vote, kids don’t have a PAC, and kids can’t hire lobbyists.

But kids do have us, and we should let them know we are watching and keeping tabs on “Who’s for Kids, and Who’s Just Kidding.”