Christopher A. Coons headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Delaware
Born
September 9, 1963
Age 62
Phone
(202) 224-5042
Office
218 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Delaware

Christopher A. Coons

Christopher Andrew Coons is an American lawyer and politician serving as the senior United States senator from Delaware, a seat he has held since 2010. A member of the Democratic Party, Coons served as the county executive of New Castle County from 2005 to 2010.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 788
Yes31%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting5%
Party align94%
Cross-party6%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Christopher A. Coons headshot
Christopher A. Coons
U.S. SenatorDemocratDelaware
SoupScore
Christopher A.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 51 sponsored · 354 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

While Trump cozies up to dictators, he’s silencing America’s voice abroad by dismantling outlets like Voice of America that counter disinformation and promote democracy.
Last week, I introduced an amendment to protect kids, seniors, and Americans with disabilities from the red tape Republicans designed to take away health care. Republicans voted it down—and then passed the bill anyway. Now 17 million Americans stand to lose their healthcare.
Happy Independence Day! Today we celebrate our freedom and recommit ourselves to completing the unfinished work of our nation. Today, I’m reflecting on our shared responsibility to uphold our democracy, protect our liberties, and ensure justice for all.
Trump rushed to declare mission accomplished after strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites—but we don’t yet know the full story. Our intelligence community is the envy of the world – we should trust their assessment instead of jumping to conclusions.
We need to be making it clear every day that the Republican agenda of high tariffs and stripping away healthcare from millions of vulnerable people to rig the tax code is going to raise everyone’s costs and make life harder for the middle class.
Jesus fed the hungry, healed the sick, and loved His neighbors — we’re told to do the same. But the GOP tax bill that just PASSED serves billionaires while starving those who need support the most. It’s immoral and unfaithful.
If you’re tuning into the Senate floor right now, here’s what’s at stake: children and seniors losing coverage, hospitals and nursing homes closing, ERs overrun. All to line the pockets of billionaires.
More than 24 hours after starting to vote on amendments, Republicans STILL haven’t finished making last minute changes to this bill.⁣ ⁣ Here’s what hasn’t changed – this bill will devastate thousands of families across Delaware.⁣ ⁣ It’s big. But it’s not beautiful. I’m still a NO.
My Republican colleagues don't know everything that's in the final bill we're about to vote on. But they do know it strips healthcare from millions of Americans. And rigs the tax code even more for the ultra-wealthy. And explodes the deficit by trillions. Apparently, that's enough for most of them.
The sun just rose at the Capitol, where my Democratic colleagues and I have spent all day and all night offering amendment after amendment to improve this so-called 'big beautiful bill,' but the GOP keeps blocking us. I'm going to vote NO when—or if!—we finally vote on whether to pass the bill.
There are over 2,000 references in Scripture to caring for the poor—but not one that calls for stripping healthcare from vulnerable people to pay for tax breaks for the wealthy. I know of no faith that preaches the values contained in the GOP tax bill we’re voting on tonight.
I don’t see how you can read the Gospels, and read the bill we’re voting on in the Senate today, and see the same spirit in both. My faith and values call on me to oppose this awful GOP tax bill.
Ask some of our nation’s most vulnerable citizens—seniors in nursing homes, disabled Americans, newborn children—if they think a bill that takes away their health care is ‘beautiful.’ I don’t think so either, and that’s why I’m in the Senate today ready to vote against this bill.
My Democratic colleagues have been voting all day—and we’ll keep at it—to make this bill less harmful. Republicans block our amendments because they like what the current bill does: it strips healthcare from millions of Americans to rig the tax code even more for the wealthy.
The GOP tax bill will wrap up millions of Americans – kids, seniors, folks with disabilities – with miles of red tape intended to make it impossible for them to keep their healthcare. I introduced an amendment to remove these obstacles. Nearly every Republican voted against it.
Nothing phony about it. Since Trump first pulled us out of the Iran nuclear deal, the world has only become more dangerous. He’s rushing to mission accomplished when what we need is to give our intelligence community time to do their jobs.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
788 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
2026-05-19S.J. Res. 185 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 185YESYESMotion to Discharge Agreed to (50-47)
2026-05-19End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-47)
2026-05-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-38)
2026-05-19End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-38)
2026-05-18S. Res. 690 (119th)Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (46-43)
2026-05-14S. Res. 690 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 130 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-53)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 141 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (50-50)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 132 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (48-52)
2026-05-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2026-05-13S. Res. 526 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (99-0, 3/5 majority required)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 163 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 163YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (49-50)
2026-05-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2026-05-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2026-05-11End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-44)
2026-05-11S. Res. 690 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOResolution Agreed to (46-45)
2026-04-30S.J. Res. 184 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-30S. Res. 690 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 99 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 139 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2026-04-28S.J. Res. 124 (119th)Point of Order S.J.Res. 124NONOPoint of Order Well Taken (51-47)
2026-04-28S. Res. 690 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2026-04-27End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-37)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Accept House changesNONOConcurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-49)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-50)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (25-73)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794)NONOMotion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414)NONOMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 4956)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hirono Amdt. No. 4884)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (98-0)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22S.J. Res. 114 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (46-51)
2026-04-21S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2026-04-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (47-46)
2026-04-16End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-48)
2026-04-16H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (50-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-48)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 138 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138NOYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (36-63)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 32 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32NOYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (40-59)

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.

Page 1 / 16Next →