Tammy Duckworth headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Illinois
Born
March 12, 1968
Age 58
Phone
(202) 224-2854
Office
524 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Illinois

Tammy Duckworth

Ladda Tammy Duckworth is an American politician and Army National Guard veteran serving as the junior United States senator from Illinois, a seat she has held since 2017. A member of the Democratic Party, she represented Illinois's 8th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2013 to 2017.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 783
Yes27%
No66%
Present0%
Not Voting7%
Party align97%
Cross-party2%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Tammy Duckworth headshot
Tammy Duckworth
U.S. SenatorDemocratIllinois
SoupScore
Tammy's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 49 sponsored · 366 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Every Republican who votes for this budget will be saying they're just fine with Trump's tariffs skyrocketing costs and tanking Americans' retirement plans—   Fine with Trump's plans to slash Medicare and Medicaid to fund billionaire tax breaks—   Fine with screwing you over.
Firing 10,000 workers from HHS will do nothing for efficiency, but it will jeopardize Medicare and Medicaid. It will cause disruptions or backlog that could be a matter of life and death. Republicans are playing with people's lives.
Again and again, Trump chooses loyalty to himself over keeping Americans safe. Everyone who cares about our national security knows that General Haugh should be rehired and Pete Hegseth should be fired. It’s that simple.
Grocery bills are already high enough. Meanwhile, Trump's tariffs will make groceries even more expensive—and he expects us to just bear with him while he refuses to rule out the possibility of a recession. That's one of the worst plans I've ever heard.
Hegseth recklessly sharing airstrike plans on an unclassified messaging app must be investigated—not just by DoD’s watchdog, but also by the FBI and Congress.   These senior Trump officials must be held accountable for needlessly putting our troops and national security at risk.
BREAKING: The Pentagon's acting inspector general announces an investigation into Pete Hegseth's use of a Signal chat for Houthi attack plans.
In Myanmar’s hour of need, the U.S. is nowhere to be found. Meanwhile, China and Russia are providing life-saving aid, gaining goodwill and filling the leadership vacuum left by Trump and Elon Musk’s foolish retreat. An international disgrace. www.nytimes.com/2025/04/02/u...
Heartbreaking news. I extend my deepest condolences to the loved ones of all the servicemembers who were lost in this tragic training accident, including Sgt. Jose Duenez Jr. of Joliet, Illinois.
 
We honor and salute their service to this nation.
An Army sergeant from Joliet was among four U.S. soldiers who were found dead in Lithuania a week after they went missing in an armored vehicle.
Gmail. Signal chats. What else??? This pattern is proof that this is an intentional policy by the Trump Admin to use unclassified platforms to discuss classified information. How many servicemembers have been placed at greater risk? This demands an investigation.
We knew that you don't title “Houthi PC Small Group” if it was the first time. This is an egregious pattern that makes it clear: These people obviously cannot keep our servicemembers—or any of us—safe.
Politico: Waltz’s team set up at least 20 Signal group chats for crises across the world
Don't be fooled. Trump's "Liberation Day" is a disaster in the making for middle-class Americans.

Trump's tsunami of tariffs will make groceries and other everyday items more expensive, costing families an extra $6,000 a year.

That's the last thing Americans need right now.
A tearful moment that shouldn't go unnoticed.
  Watch my friend @booker.senate.gov so passionately call out Trump and Elon Musk's complete betrayal of our Veterans.
Another important moment in Congress yesterday. With their futile attempt to block new parents from voting remotely, Republican leaders once again proved they're not actually pro-family. Not on this. Not on IVF. Not on lowering costs for middle-class families. Not on anything.
Millions of people are autistic—our neighbors, friends and loved ones. Yet, too many do not have equal opportunities. Today, on World Autism Awareness Day, we reaffirm our commitment to making our global community more inclusive, accessible and just for everyone.
This is a moment for the history books. I’m deeply impressed with my friend @booker.senate.gov for the good trouble he’s making, and I’m proud to work alongside him as we fight back against Musk and Trump’s efforts to turn our democracy into an oligarchy. abcnews.go.com/Politics/boo...
Our farmers have been hit with body blow after body blow by this Trump-Musk oligarchy. This Administration is failing to live up to the promises it’s made to our farmers.
Trump is gutting the VA and firing more Veterans than any other President in modern history. It’s a complete betrayal to those who answer the call to defend us. I’m helping Senator Booker hold the floor to show that unlike Republicans— Democrats have our heroes’ backs.
BREAKING: I'm introducing the IVF for Military Families Act with Rep. Jacobs which would help ensure IVF costs are covered for our servicemembers who rely on it to build their families.

If Trump really wants to keep his promise on IVF, supporting this should be easy. abcnews.go.com/Politics/dem...
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
2025-05-06S.J. Res. 13 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-05-06H.J. Res. 61 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (55-45)
2025-05-05H.J. Res. 61 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-43)
2025-05-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-05-01S.J. Res. 31 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-46)
2025-05-01H.J. Res. 75 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-45)
2025-04-30S.J. Res. 31 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-40)
2025-04-30S.J. Res. 49 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (49-49, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-04-30S.J. Res. 49 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Defeated (49-49)
2025-04-30H.J. Res. 75 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-04-30H.J. Res. 42 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-46)
2025-04-29H.J. Res. 42 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeYESYESNomination Confirmed (83-14)
2025-04-29End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (84-13)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-36)
2025-04-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (62-36)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2025-04-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-39)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (67-29)
2025-04-28End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (64-27)
2025-04-11Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-25)
2025-04-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-25)
2025-04-11Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-26)
2025-04-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-25)
2025-04-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-46)
2025-04-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-04-10H.J. Res. 20 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (53-44)
2025-04-09H.J. Res. 20 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-42)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-46)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-37)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2025-04-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-04-08End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-42)
2025-04-08End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-04-08End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-37)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-04-08Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (66-32)
2025-04-08End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (67-32)
2025-04-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2025-04-07End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-39)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Accept House changesNONOConcurrent Resolution Agreed to (51-48)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-05Motion (Motion to Waive Section 305(b)(2) of the CBA re: Cortez Masto Amdt. No. 1690)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-50, 3/5 majority required)

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 12 / 16Next →