While SCOTUS limited Trump’s ability to fire Lisa Cook, the President has vowed to continue his efforts. We cannot allow this dangerous erosion of Fed independence to continue.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Colorado
Michael F. Bennet
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 890
Yes27%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting9%
Party align96%
Cross-party3%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Michael F. Bennet
U.S. SenatorDemocratColorado
SoupScore
Michael F.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 78 sponsored · 270 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Instead of taking responsibility for his disastrous economic policies that have devastated Coloradans, the President instead made it his mission to undermine the Federal Reserve.
This sets a dangerous precedent for agencies Congress established to be independent. By allowing Trump to remove Rebecca Slaughter from the FTC, the Court has seriously weakened the ability of federal agencies to act free from undue influence from the President and political party in power.
Today, SCOTUS has given the green light to President Trump to fire nearly any Senate-confirmed official he wants without cause.
In a victory for voters — especially servicemembers, college students, and Americans abroad — the Court reaffirmed what millions of Americans across the country have come to expect: that ballots postmarked by Election Day and received soon after still count.
Today, the Supreme Court upheld the ability of states to set their own election laws.
This Pride Month, we honor the courage of those who fought back during the Stonewall riots and catalyzed the LGBTQ+ community to organize openly and unapologetically for equal rights.
57 years ago, Stonewall ignited the modern gay rights movement, an unflinching stand against the discrimination and criminalization still faced by the LGBTQ+ community.
Happy Pride, Colorado!
I won’t stop fighting to make sure LGBTQ+ Coloradans always feel safe, welcome, and protected in our state.
We're also thinking of the firefighters who remain on the front lines today, risking their lives to protect our communities.
Susan and I are grateful for their bravery and are keeping everyone affected in our thoughts.
These heroic Americans answered the call to keep our communities safe. We owe them, and every wildland firefighter, a debt we can never fully repay.
Our hearts are with the families, loved ones, and fellow firefighters grieving the loss of three wildland firefighters who gave their lives protecting others.
Glad to see the Pentagon once again recognize Peterson Space Force Base as one of the best-run military installations in the country.
I'll keep doing everything I can to support their mission and Colorado's military community.
www.koaa.com/news/local-n...
Lasting change requires all of us coming together and working toward a more equal future.
Together, we’ll keep fighting for LGBTQ+ protections and stand up to Trump’s attacks.
Together we will defend hard-won protections for our LGBTQ+ community and fight against Trump’s bigoted attacks.
No one should be discriminated against for who they are or who they love.
Today, we celebrate over a decade of marriage equality across the country. We must keep fighting to protect and expand liberties for every American.
Congress must act to protect TPS holders and their families by creating a pathway to citizenship.
Legal immigrants granted Temporary Protected Status because they’d face imminent danger back home have followed the rules, passed background checks, paid fees, and built their lives here. They are our neighbors, co-workers, parents, and caregivers.
Today’s Supreme Court decision expands Trump’s authority to dismantle legal immigration, tear apart families, and hurt communities across Colorado and the country.
This week, I introduced the Latonya Reeves Freedom Act, which would advance the goal of ensuring people with disabilities can receive the support they need in their communities.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History890 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
890 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (55-44) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-45) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-46) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (77-23) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (59-38) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-35) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (80-17) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (78-20) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-42) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-42) |
| 2025-01-28 | H.R. 23 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-28 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (77-22) |
| 2025-01-27 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (97-0) |
| 2025-01-27 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (68-29) |
| 2025-01-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-23) |
| 2025-01-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-34) |
| 2025-01-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-39) |
| 2025-01-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (72-26) |
| 2025-01-22 | S. 6 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-21 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-01-21 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46) |
| 2025-01-20 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (99-0) |
| 2025-01-20 | S. 5 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (64-35) |
| 2025-01-20 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Amendment Agreed to (75-24) |
| 2025-01-17 | S. 5 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-35, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-15 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-49) |
| 2025-01-15 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Amendment Agreed to (70-25) |
| 2025-01-13 | S. 5 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-10) |
| 2025-01-09 | S. 5 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-9, 3/5 majority required) |
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.
← PrevPage 18 / 18