This hopeful moment must mark a turning point in the years-long efforts to deescalate tensions in the region. The war in Gaza must end, the threat posed by Hamas must be eliminated, the continued suffering of innocent Palestinians in Gaza must be alleviated & a two-state solution must be negotiated.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Illinois
Tammy Duckworth
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 783
Yes27%
No66%
Present0%
Not Voting7%
Party align97%
Cross-party2%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Tammy Duckworth
U.S. SenatorDemocratIllinois
SoupScore
Tammy's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 49 sponsored · 364 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Such an incredible relief.
I am thrilled for the families who will be able to hug their loved ones for the first time in more than 2 years, but my heart also goes out to so many others who, in the terrible wake of 10/7, will never see theirs again--including the family of Hersh Goldberg-Polin.
Without ACA tax credits, a 64-year-old couple making $90K would face an extra $26,000 a year in premiums.
Democrats are working to protect families—Republicans are ready to let these credits expire.
I was on the ground today in Broadview with Senator Durbin to conduct Congressional oversight on ICE’s processing facility.
As elected officials, we have a duty to ensure transparency within federal facilities. What is ICE hiding? Kristi Noem, what are you hiding?
These firings are illegal—
And yet another example of Trump finding new ways to inflict harm on the American people and the programs they rely on.
He's playing with Americans' livelihoods to try and help Republicans pass a budget that would kick you off your health care.
Trump: "We're not cutting Medicaid."
Also Trump: Signs the largest Medicaid cut in history into law.
There’s no Democratic “wish list.” We just want Trump to keep his promise: repeal the cuts and lower costs.
UPDATE: While it shouldn't have taken this long for the Senate to look into Trump’s egregious abuse of our military, I have secured a hearing to investigate his deployments of troops into our cities—
And I’ll be asking tough questions of the Trump Administration when it happens.
Trump is forcing the military to our cities, intimidating Americans and distracting troops from their core missions.
It's unconstitutional—we can't act like it's business as usual.
I'm blocking the NDAA until we secure a hearing to investigate this gross abuse of our military.
Reposted byTammy Duckworth
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.
@durbin.senate.gov @merkley.senate.gov @wyden.senate.gov @padilla.senate.gov @schiff.senate.gov
Trump is moving us closer to authoritarianism with each deployment of troops into states.
From Illinois to Oregon to California—
None of our states asked for this, nor need this.
I and every U.S. Senator from these states are demanding Trump to end these deployments ASAP.
I cherished every day I got to call myself a Soldier—but ordering troops to intimidate the very Americans they sacrifice to protect doesn’t make us safer.
Trump is wasting millions to terrorize citizens exercising their First Amendment rights. It's wrong.
In addition to kicking 250,000+ Veterans off their health coverage, don't forget:
Trump fired more Veterans than any other President and is hellbent on firing thousands of VA workers as well.
He doesn't care about Veterans or middle-class families.
He only cares about himself.
This is what dictators and authoritarians do, not Presidents of the United States of America.
Trump: "I will immediately bring prices down, starting on Day One."
Also Trump: Refuses to stop health insurance premiums from bankrupting the middle class
Democrats just want Trump to keep his promises.
Trump keeps saying he needs to send federal agents in to protect Chicago because the Police aren't doing the job.
You know what makes it hard for our city's brave police officers to do their jobs?
Trump's agents throwing tear gas at them.
We have the Insurrection Act for a reason—
But it's not so a President with 34 felonies can ignore court orders and punish cities he doesn't like with military intimidation.
Especially not when the courts are telling him his claims of insurrection are "untethered to the facts."
We have not called for this. We do not need this.
Donald Trump is pitting sovereign states against one another in effort to consolidate his own power at the expense of our constitutional rights—
An egregious abuse of power.
He is pushing us closer to authoritarianism.
Trump is federalizing the National Guard in Illinois against our will—
An affront to American values and an extreme abuse of our military.
He’s terrorizing citizens in attempt to expand his power and punish opponents.
That’s just not who we are.
It’s authoritarian.
An American President is intentionally hurting Americans to score cheap political points.
This is not normal.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History783 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
783 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 141 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-50) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 132 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-52) |
| 2026-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2026-05-13 | S. Res. 526 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (99-0, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 163 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 163 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (49-50) |
| 2026-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2026-05-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-05-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-44) |
| 2026-05-11 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (46-45) |
| 2026-04-30 | S.J. Res. 184 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-30 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 99 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 139 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2026-04-28 | S.J. Res. 124 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 124 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Well Taken (51-47) |
| 2026-04-28 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2026-04-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-37) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-49) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (25-73) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 4956) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hirono Amdt. No. 4884) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (98-0) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S.J. Res. 114 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (46-51) |
| 2026-04-21 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2026-04-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (47-46) |
| 2026-04-16 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-48) |
| 2026-04-16 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 138 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (36-63) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 32 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (40-59) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 123 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 123 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2026-04-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
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 →