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

Voting Record — 885
Yes29%
No64%
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 · 61 sponsored · 422 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

NEWS: In a complete reversal, Senate Republicans threw out my bill that would cover IVF for our servicemembers in the next defense bill. They supported it last year. And the year before. But this year, they chose to betray our heroes who dream of having a family. Outrageous.
Yesterday, the Senate Armed Services Committee cleared the next defense authorization bill. I voted no. Trump continues to threaten strikes and operations that require ground troops. Two of our pilots were shot down. The Strait remains blocked. And families cannot afford gas or groceries.
Reposted byTammy Duckworth
The Congressional Award Gold Medal is the highest honor that Congress can bestow upon young adults. Today, @duckworth.senate.gov & I met with four Illinoisans who received the Gold Medal to congratulate them on their accomplishment & thank them for their contributions to their communities.
Insist elections are rigged despite zero evidence, silence the press... and find an excuse to deploy our military around election season to intimidate voters. This is the authoritarian playbook.
On D-Day, 82 years ago, thousands of brave servicemembers stormed Normandy's beaches with one shared goal: defeat fascism, uphold democracy. Today, we honor those who fought for freedom.
Americans are getting pummeled by sky-high costs—and Senate Republicans couldn’t care less. Instead of fighting to lower energy and grocery bills, Republicans spent all day and night fighting to bankroll ICE and Border Patrol. It’s Trump first, America last. Every damn time.
BREAKING: The Senate passes a $70B immigration enforcement bill without limits on President Trump's settlement fund.
NEW: Senate GOP just began votes on their corrupt bill to hand another $70 billion to ICE and Border Patrol.   Meanwhile, there’s $0 to help you with soaring costs caused by Trump’s war.   It’s outrageous. Senate Democrats will be introducing amendments all day to fight this.
Huge news if you love meritocracy. Our transgender servicemembers earned their roles in our military, making us more lethal and prepared to defend America from her enemies. And that's something Hegseth can't say.
PBS News: Appeals court panel rules that transgender troops were illegally barred from U.S. military service
Of all the things our men and women in uniform put up with in the middle of a war... Being used to stroke Trump's ego at his ridiculous UFC birthday party should not be on that list.
The Pentagon is moving to recruit hundreds of troops to appear as spectators at Trump's UFC cage-fighting event at the White House — and requiring those who attend to pay for their travel and meet height and weight requirements.
Do they care about our national security at all? Trump is plunging us further into war, cozying up to dictators and alienating our partners. The last thing we need is an inexperienced, partisan yes-man leading our intelligence community. This doesn’t make America safer.
Trump says he is appointing his ally and loyalist Bill Pulte as Acting DNI. Pulte has no national intelligence experience, but he has used his current role as head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency to pursue phony mortgage fraud allegations against Trump’s political opponents.
Pete Hegseth—who never ranked higher than Major—is once again ignoring Generals' recommendations and denying merit-based promotions. For all his bluster about bringing meritocracy back to our military, this unqualified SecDef keeps doing the opposite. An insult to our troops.
Breaking News: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth blocked the promotions of at least seven Navy officers in a move that targeted women and minority officers.
I just watched Hegseth’s speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. Let’s be clear about what the Trump Administration’s “Peace Through Strength” has looked like.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
885 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
2025-08-02End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-41)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-44)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (81-15)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (21-75)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (15-81)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGNOAmendment Rejected (14-81)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGYESAmendment Rejected (45-50)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGYESAmendment Rejected (42-53)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGYESAmendment Rejected (44-51)
2025-08-01Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Points of Order Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 3114)NOT_VOTINGYESMotion Rejected (44-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-08-01End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-41)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-07-31End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-41)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-38)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 34 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 34YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (24-73)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 41 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 41YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (27-70)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-49)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-44)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-07-28Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (50-39)
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-07-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-48)
2025-07-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)

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.

← PrevPage 9 / 18Next →