Republicans have 2 choices:
1.) Let families keep tax breaks to afford health care
2.) Jack up health care costs for millions of Americans
I know where I stand, and it’s on the side of making sure people don’t go bankrupt just to afford the care they need.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Wisconsin
Tammy Baldwin
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 772
Yes30%
No70%
Present0%
Not Voting0%
Party align97%
Cross-party2%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Tammy Baldwin
U.S. SenatorDemocratWisconsin
SoupScore
Tammy's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 43 sponsored · 260 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
To me, it doesn’t matter if you are a Democrat, Republican, or an independent – I want you to have health care you can afford. My colleagues need to join me. The people who voted them in are crying out for help.
Parents in Wauwatosa know that just about everything is getting more expensive as Trump’s tariffs continue to jack up costs this holiday season. It's past time President Trump gets serious about lowering costs for families instead of making things worse.
Looks like the Grinch can take the holiday season off — Trump’s tariffs are stealing Christmas this year.
The Trump administration is defunding lifesaving research and putting cures on the back burner so they can give big corporations huge tax breaks.
We should be giving families hope, not billionaires another yacht or private jet.
This is the price hike that a father from Neenah will have to pay next year if Republicans keep going down this path and refuse to act. This is what thousands of Wisconsinites are bracing for.
The clock is almost up. Republicans and the President need to decide now whose side they are on: Are they going to lower costs for millions of families or be responsible for owning the price hike?
thehill.com/homenews/sen...
This is bad news for Wisconsin workers and Americans’ safety, and good news for China. We need some answers from the Navy. www.jsonline.com/story/news/2...
This guy was convicted of smuggling nearly a million pounds of cocaine. And President Trump is going to let him out of jail scot-free? C’mon.
So much for tough on drugs. This is an embarrassment to our rule of law, and Wisconsinites need some answers.
www.nytimes.com/2025/11/29/n...
Donald Trump’s idea of a Golden Age seems to be higher living costs for working families.
When we talk about taking on big drug companies and lowering costs, this is what we mean.
We have more work to do to fix our mess of a health care system, but I am proud to have voted to make this progress.
www.reuters.com/business/hea...
This administration is trying to shut down the Department of Education, and it’s simply a bad idea — and Wisconsin children and families are going to pay the price.
Wisconsinites shouldn’t have to get a 2nd or 3rd job, come out of retirement, or go bankrupt just to be able to afford health care. I cannot, and will not, stop fighting these price hikes for working families.
After cutting lifesaving research into medical breakthroughs, wasting billions of taxpayer dollars, and just causing chaos, DOGE has been eliminated to…get this…save money.
That, folks, is what I call the real waste and abuse.
Americans are not just losing this food assistance out of nowhere. The Trump administration and Congressional Republicans passed a bill that will take away SNAP from families so they could fund a tax break for their wealthy friends.
The Affordable Care Act lets Wisconsinites sleep at night knowing that a health emergency won’t send them into bankruptcy. But that security is on the brink of being stripped away from millions of families. I heard from Wausau families about the worry & pain this will cause them.
Today, we mark 4 years since the Waukesha Christmas Parade tragedy. As we remember the lives lost and victims of this senseless violence, we recognize that though the wounds of this tragedy still haven’t healed, the Wisconsin community will keep standing together, stronger.
Billionaires didn't have to be patient for their massive tax cut, but working families who need relief do?
www.cnn.com/2025/11/20/p...
Living your life as your true, authentic self shouldn’t put a target on your back. But that’s not the case for too many transgender Americans, and it must stop. I stand with the trans community as we remember the lives taken in hateful acts of violence.
The President’s call for the murder of Americans is simply un-American. When I say there is no place in our country for political violence, I mean it. It doesn’t matter who says it or why. There is no justification. Every American should condemn this in no uncertain terms.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History772 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
772 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-01-29 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-55, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-27 | S. 3627 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (82-15) |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (85-14, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-14 | S.J. Res. 98 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 98 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Well Taken (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2026-01-13 | S.J. Res. 84 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-01-12 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (80-13, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-40) |
| 2026-01-08 | S.J. Res. 98 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 98 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2026-01-07 | S.J. Res. 86 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (43-50) |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2026-01-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-35) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-42) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-35) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (58-36) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S.J. Res. 82 (119th) | Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 82 | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (50-50) |
| 2025-12-17 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (71-29) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (69-27) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | S. 1071 (119th) | Accept House changes | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Agreed to (77-20) |
| 2025-12-15 | S. 1071 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-20, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 1071 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (75-22) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | Resolution S.Res. 532 | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 3385 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 3386 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-10 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-12-10 | S.J. Res. 82 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-49) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-12-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-12-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-32) |
| 2025-12-04 | S. Res. 520 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (43-37, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-04 | H.J. Res. 131 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 131 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-45) |
| 2025-12-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (63-34) |
| 2025-12-03 | S.J. Res. 91 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (49-47) |
| 2025-12-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-41) |
| 2025-12-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-40) |
| 2025-12-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-39) |
| 2025-12-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-36) |
| 2025-12-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-12-01 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-41) |
| 2025-11-20 | H.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 130 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-43) |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.