Big Tech refuses to incorporate safeguards into their platforms. These three bills will help curb horrific child exploitation crimes online.
Congress has spent enough time investigating.
Now we must act.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Illinois
Richard J. Durbin
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 851
Yes35%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align93%
Cross-party6%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Richard J. Durbin
U.S. SenatorDemocratIllinois
SoupScore
Richard J.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 129 sponsored · 356 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Big Tech refuses to incorporate safeguards into their platforms. These three bills will help curb horrific child exploitation crimes online.
Congress has spent enough time investigating.
Now we must act.
Reposted bySenator Dick Durbin
BREAKING: Sens. DURBIN, GRASSLEY introduce landmark legislative package to help protect kids online.
Americans are feeling the pain of President Trump’s economic policies. Congress doesn’t need to add to that by allowing health insurance premiums to double or triple next year.
Because of Trump’s tariffs, Illinois farmers need help. The President sends $20 billion in relief to Argentina’s farmers, but $11 billion to American farmers instead of ending his tariffs that hurt U.S. agriculture.
I encourage President Trump to follow the longstanding bipartisan practice of working with the home state Senators to identify and nominate a well-qualified nonpartisan replacement, rather than skirting federal law by misusing the interim U.S. Attorney statute.
After the district court followed the law and declined to appoint her, she served unlawfully and helped to weaponize the Justice Department.
She has a hyper-partisan background and lacks relevant experience.
Alina Habba should’ve never been appointed as interim U.S. Attorney in the first place.
The Democratic proposal that will be voted on this week is simple. A clean extension of the enhanced premium tax credits that help millions of Americans afford their health insurance. Let’s get this done and protect our constituents’ health care.
This week, Senate Republicans will be faced with a choice: will they work together with Senate Democrats to keep health insurance premium costs down for 22 million Americans or will they remain silent and allow premiums to skyrocket?
Congratulations to Illinois students, who are first in the nation for FAFSA completion!
For anyone who hasn’t filled out their FAFSA, here is the link to the form: studentaid.gov/h/apply-for-....
It only takes 30 minutes and can help fund your future!
Democrats unveiled a plan this week to prevent health insurance premiums from doubling or tripling next year for more than 20 million Americans.
Where’s the Republican plan?
I’m a proud son of an immigrant. When you step into my office, you’ll see my mom’s naturalization certificate.
The Dream Act is what America needs.
I’m a proud son of an immigrant. When you step into my office, you’ll see my mom’s naturalization certificate.
The Dream Act is what America needs.
Sadly, CDC’s vaccine recommendations are guided by conspiracy theories, not science. Today’s vote puts lives at risk, especially children’s.
For families with a baby on the way: please speak with your pediatrician about how best to protect your child from Hepatitis B and preventable illnesses.
Even President Trump knows that his tariffs are hurting the American economy and people’s pocketbooks.
That’s why he watered down his own economic proposal when he suspended tariffs on bananas, coffee, beef, and clothing.
Predatory for-profit colleges entice students to enroll just to offer a flimsy degree and mountains of debt.
It’s been my honor to fight for more protections for students and to work together with The Institute For College Access And Success and the Protect Students and Taxpayers Coalition.
I introduced the FERC Greenhouse Gas and Environmental Justice Policy Act to ensure climate impacts are considered when natural gas pipelines are built. This bill will protect the communities most impacted by the climate crisis while ensuring access to safe and affordable energy.
Today’s DOD IG report reinforces what we already knew: Secretary Hegseth does not have the judgement required of the person tasked with leading the DOD. By recklessly shooting off texts about classified war plans, Secretary Hegseth risked the lives of American service members.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History851 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
851 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-02-26 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-34) |
| 2026-02-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2026-02-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2026-02-24 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-02-12 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-02-12 | H.J. Res. 142 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-47) |
| 2026-02-11 | H.J. Res. 142 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-02-10 | S.J. Res. 95 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-51) |
| 2026-02-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2026-02-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-47) |
| 2026-02-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-46) |
| 2026-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2026-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (58-39) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-39) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-44) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (54-40) |
| 2026-02-02 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-40) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Bill Passed (71-29, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 4287) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (58-42) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (58-42) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (67-33) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (32-67) |
| 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 | YES | 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 | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-42) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-35) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (58-36) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S.J. Res. 82 (119th) | Approve resolution | 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) |
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.