Confirming Justice Jackson is one of the great accomplishments of the Senate Democratic Majority during the Biden administration.
Three years of even-handed rulings in lockstep with the rule of law.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Illinois
Richard J. Durbin
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.
We all know someone who has been uninsured—I was one of them.
I wrote about the importance of Medicaid and why Republicans’ plans to slash it would be devastating to the families who depend on it.
I will fight to protect Medicaid because American lives are on the line. Read more. ⬇️
For so many people, Medicaid is there when you need it most.
People who depend upon Medicaid for nursing home care, for the birth of their child, or simply because their job doesn’t offer it.
A dear friend of mine had to put his wife in a care facility because of Alzheimer’s.
When President Trump and Elon Musk talk about health care, they see numbers on a ledger.
But they forget the real people behind the numbers.
I remember the night that Republican Senator John McCain helped save the Affordable Care Act.
He walked on to the Senate floor and lifted his arm just enough to flash a thumbs down.
America is going to need more McCain Moments to save health care.
Last night, Senate Dems were on the floor fighting for working families one amendment at a time while Republicans struck down each one.
Their message was clear: Let’s give billionaires a tax break and have everyday Americans pay for it by slashing Medicaid, Social Security, vets’ benefits, & more.
Putin and his cronies are committing unthinkable acts of horror against families in Ukraine.
The Senate had the chance to ensure there would be no disruption in security assistance, but Republicans blocked it.
I will always stand with our allies and democracy… even if Republicans won’t.
🇺🇸🤝🇺🇦
Reposted bySenator Dick Durbin
Republicans just blocked a commonsense amendment to prevent apps like Signal from being used to transmit info about sensitive military operations.
Pete Hegseth, Mike Waltz, and our adversaries are probably thrilled.
Republicans are willing to spend BIG money for billionaires… but they cry foul when it’s health care for families.
They just blocked an amendment to stop the national debt from DOUBLING.
Reposted bySenator Dick Durbin
Republicans just blocked a commonsense amendment to prevent an explosion of the national debt.
“The party of fiscal responsibility,” folks.
I’ve *never* forgotten this when health care is up for debate.
ALL of us want good health insurance. The thought of cutting health care to give the wealthiest people a tax break is insensible, unthoughtful, and inhumane.
I prayed to God the doctor would be able to save my baby’s life.
She survived.
But I’ve never felt more helpless in my life than at that moment. My little girl came into this world, and we were so blessed to have her. But her father couldn’t provide her health insurance.
What happens when you don’t have health insurance when you most need it? You feel helpless.
I’ve been there.
Our first daughter was born with a serious heart defect, and I couldn’t afford health insurance.
We sat in a hospital’s charity ward.
$5.3 TRILLION.
That’s how much Republicans are trying to spend on tax breaks for billionaires.
Reposted bySenator Dick Durbin
If Republicans are going to force a bad budget, we’re going to force tough amendment votes.
And we’ll stay up all night doing it. ❤
A great President once said: “Don’t tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I’ll tell you what you value.”
Republicans are showing us EXACTLY what they value with this budget scam.
Billionaires win, families lose.
The Trump Administration is targeting students for speech protected by the First Amendment.
There’s no “controversial speech” exception to our Constitutional rights.
The Administration must terminate removal proceedings against Rumeysa Ozturk, Mahmoud Khalil, and all those targeted.
BREAKING: @sanders.senate.gov and I just called on President Trump to release Rumeysa Ozturk, Mahmoud Khalil, and all those targeted for protected First Amendment activities.
My roots are in downstate Illinois. Born in East St. Louis, raising my family in Springfield.
Republicans’ proposed cuts to Medicaid would devastate rural areas.
Hospitals will close. People will lose their jobs, and others will have to travel further for care. Quality of life will become worse.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-42) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-37) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (66-32) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-32) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-04-07 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-39) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 305(b)(2) of the CBA re: Cortez Masto Amdt. No. 1690) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (5-94) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-48) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | S.J. Res. 26 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 26 | YES | NO | ✕ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (15-83) |
| 2025-04-03 | S.J. Res. 33 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 33 | YES | NO | ✕ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (15-82) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | H.J. Res. 24 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (53-42) |
| 2025-04-02 | H.J. Res. 24 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-04-02 | S.J. Res. 37 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-48) |
| 2025-04-02 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-04-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-04-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-03-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-42) |
| 2025-03-27 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-03-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-03-27 | S.J. Res. 18 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-48) |
| 2025-03-26 | S.J. Res. 18 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
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.