Catherine Cortez Masto headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Nevada
Born
March 29, 1964
Age 62
Phone
(202) 224-3542
Office
309 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Nevada

Catherine Cortez Masto

Catherine Marie Cortez Masto is an American lawyer and politician serving as the senior United States senator from Nevada, a seat she has held since 2017. A member of the Democratic Party, Cortez Masto served as the 32nd attorney general of Nevada from 2007 to 2015.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 783
Yes34%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align91%
Cross-party9%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Catherine Cortez Masto headshot
Catherine Cortez Masto
U.S. SenatorDemocratNevada
SoupScore
Catherine's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 103 sponsored · 241 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Senate Democrats stopped Trump’s SAVE America Act by making it clear how harmful this voter suppression bill would be to citizens. This is a victory for Nevadans, and now I'm focused on continuing to protect our state from Trump's attempts to silence our voices.
Today, we honor their memory and recommit ourselves to the work we must do to keep Tribal communities safe. Working together, we’ve made real progress. But I’m not done fighting to end the MMIW crisis and deliver the safety and justice Tribes deserve. (2/2)
Every year, we mark Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women Awareness Day as a solemn reminder of those we have lost to this crisis, innocent women like Anna Scott and Savannah LaFontaine-Greywind who deserve to be with us now. (1/2)
And especially as this Administration continues to target our fellow Americans because of their heritage, it is an opportunity for us to stand up against hate and be proud of our story as a nation of immigrants. I hope everyone had a safe and fun weekend, ¡feliz Cinco de Mayo! (2/2)
This weekend, it was a privilege to be home to celebrate Cinco de Mayo with our Mexican-American community in Nevada. This holiday is a celebration of our heritage, our culture, and the contributions we have made to this country. (1/2)
And, it would ban AI “companions” from being made available to minors on companies’ platforms. This is bipartisan legislation to keep our kids out of harm’s way, and I’m proud to support it. I will continue working with my colleagues to pass the GUARD Act into law and stand with Nevada families.
Some good news for Nevada parents: last week, legislation I’m supporting to protect our kids from harmful AI technologies passed the Judiciary Committee. The GUARD Act is a bill that would impose real penalties on companies if their AI chatbots encourage minors to commit self-harm or violence.
Recently, the Trump Admin. announced a decision that makes it easier to deport DACA recipients despite their protected status. These are individuals who have only ever known America as their home. They grew up here, and they deserve to continue to work and build their lives here.
I have called on this Administration again and again for a plan to fix this, but they clearly don’t care. But I’m not giving up. Nevadans, and workers all over America, deserve to have their leaders fighting to grow our economy and protect American businesses. That’s what I’m focused on.
All across the country, workers and businesses that count on tourism to make a living are being hurt because of the President’s policies that have pushed international tourists to stay away from America. Now they’re choosing to travel other places.
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
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-21Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 233)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (24-76)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-21Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 776)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (51-49)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 925)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 130)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Klobuchar Amdt. No. 494)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 454)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-49)
2025-02-20End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-02-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-02-18S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47)
2025-02-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-02-18Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (48-45)
2025-02-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-43)
2025-02-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-02-13Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (72-28)
2025-02-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2025-02-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (55-44)
2025-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-45)

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 15 / 16Next →