Lisa Blunt Rochester headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Delaware
Born
February 10, 1962
Age 64
Phone
(202) 224-2441
Office
513 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Delaware

Lisa Blunt Rochester

Lisa LaTrelle Blunt Rochester is an American politician serving since 2025 as the junior United States senator from Delaware. From 2017 to 2025, she served as the U.S. representative for Delaware's at-large congressional district. A member of the Democratic Party, she is the first woman and first African American to represent Delaware in both chambers of Congress.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 783
Yes27%
No73%
Present0%
Not Voting0%
Party align98%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Lisa Blunt Rochester headshot
Lisa Blunt Rochester
U.S. SenatorDemocratDelaware
SoupScore
Lisa's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 33 sponsored · 183 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Let Me Be Blunt: this isn’t business as usual.   Republicans shut down the government and are refusing to negotiate. They’re even holding committee hearings on everything BUT their shutdown.   This week, I used my time in those hearings to remind them what’s really at stake.
Now that Trump and his allies are back in power, they're showing us what weaponization of the federal government looks like. Using the government to harass and intimidate political rivals is absolutely unacceptable.
I will not back down. Trump is now calling for the arrest of elected representatives checking his power. What else is left on the path to full-blown authoritarianism?
Donald Trump Truth Social Post: Chicago Mayor should be in jail for failing to protect Ice Officers! Governor Pritzker also.
These cruel threats do nothing to bring down the temperature, bring people back to the table, or reopen the government. The law is clear— federal workers shouldn't suffer because this administration refuses to negotiate.
Let me be clear: backpay for these workers is required under a federal law I wrote with former Senator Cardin — which Trump signed — during the last Trump shutdown. This is just more fear mongering from a president who wants a blank check for lawlessness. It won't work.
The letter of the law is as plain as can be—federal workers, including furloughed workers, are entitled to their backpay following a shutdown. Another baseless attempt to try and scare & intimidate workers by an administration run by crooks and cowards.
A draft White House memo, reported by Axios, reinterprets the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act, or GEFTA, to stiff federal workers on furlough amid the longest shutdown in U.S. history. trib.al/fWCjnLQ
Working around the clock? House Republicans haven't been here in weeks. If Republicans were the ones concerned about health care, they'd be negotiating to avert the health care crisis THEY created. It's time for the GOP to come back to Washington and do their job.
Mike Johnson: "Let me look right into the camera and tell you very clearly: Republicans are the ones concerned about healthcare. Republicans are the party working around the clock everyday to fix healthcare. This is not talking points for us: we've done it."
We should be doing everything in our power to protect our friends and neighbors from the oncoming health care crisis.   Instead, Republicans refused to negotiate and shut down the government.   My message? Get back to Washington and do your job.
Republicans shut down the government, left town, and refuse to come back. All to protect their billionaire tax cuts and keep millions of Americans uninsured. Republicans need to come back to work and reopen the government.
🚨🚨The House reading clerk just read a letter from House Speaker Mike Johnson where he declares a 'District Work Period' from October 7 to October 13. That would mean no votes in the House until mid-month.
This just shows the warped perspective this administration has on government. There aren't 'Democrat Agencies' or 'Republican Agencies'. Federal Agencies exist to help EVERY American, regardless of party. Shutting them down hurts all of us.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
783 total votes
ExpandCollapse

Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.

DateBillQuestionPositionParty MajAlign?Result
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (5-94)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-53)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-53)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-53)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (51-48)
2025-04-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-04-03H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-48)
2025-04-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-04-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-04-03S.J. Res. 26 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 26NONOMotion to Discharge Rejected (15-83)
2025-04-03S.J. Res. 33 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 33NONOMotion to Discharge Rejected (15-82)
2025-04-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-04-03H.J. Res. 24 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (53-42)
2025-04-02H.J. Res. 24 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-04-02S.J. Res. 37 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Passed (51-48)
2025-04-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-04-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-04-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-03-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-42)
2025-03-27Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-03-27End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-03-27S.J. Res. 18 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-48)
2025-03-26S.J. Res. 18 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-03-26H.J. Res. 25 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (70-28)
2025-03-26H.J. Res. 25 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28)
2025-03-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-43)
2025-03-26End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-03-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-03-26End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-03-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-03-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-03-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (56-44)
2025-03-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-44)
2025-03-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2025-03-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-03-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (74-25)
2025-03-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (73-25)
2025-03-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-31)
2025-03-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (62-30)
2025-03-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (63-32)
2025-03-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (64-33)

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 13 / 16Next →