Ruben Gallego headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Arizona
Born
November 20, 1979
Age 46
Phone
(202) 224-4521
Office
302 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Arizona

Ruben Gallego

Voting Record — 890
Yes34%
No53%
Present0%
Not Voting13%
Party align92%
Cross-party8%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Ruben Gallego headshot
Ruben Gallego
U.S. SenatorDemocratArizona
SoupScore
Ruben's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 61 sponsored · 271 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

I’ll make it clear…since Trump’s fed pick clearly can’t. In 1970 Nixon appointed his crony Arthur Burns to keep interest rates low and inflation skyrocketed. Now Trump wants to do the same.
“My mom lives paycheck to paycheck and if the AC breaks down in the summer and you can’t afford to fix it, you will die here. My dad proves that.” This story is heartbreaking. These deaths are preventable. It’s long past time we treat extreme heat like the emergency it is.
Arizona’s future isn’t decided in D.C. - it starts right here, with you. I’m heading to Tucson and Yuma to hear directly from folks on the ground, answer your questions, and make sure this administration is being held accountable. RSVP and location details coming soon.
This is disturbing. We must protect kids and teens against AI gone wrong. Ready to work with my colleagues across the aisle to hold Big Tech accountable and put more safeguards in place.
Tucson is turning 250! From its deep Indigenous roots to becoming the beating heart of Southern Arizona, it’s a city rich in history and community. Feliz cumpleaños to the Old Pueblo!
Thank you to the employees at the Phoenix VA and VAs across the country. I know firsthand the work you do saves lives. This administration may not stand up for you, but know this — there are people in Washington who value the work you do and won’t stop fighting alongside you.
Like Gabe, small business owners across Arizona are worried about staying afloat because of Trump’s reckless tariffs. Prices are already too high. Now the people powering our economy have to fight just to keep their doors open
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
890 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
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-08-02End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (49-44)
2025-08-02End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-08-02End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-41)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (51-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (51-44)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGYESAmendment Agreed to (81-15)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Final passageNOT_VOTINGYESBill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGYESAmendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGNOAmendment Rejected (21-75)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOT_VOTINGNOAmendment 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 debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (54-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-08-01End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-41)
2025-07-31End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-07-31End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-41)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-38)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 34 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 34NOT_VOTINGYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (24-73)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 41 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 41NOT_VOTINGYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (27-70)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination 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)

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 →