Stripping Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks of its protections would be a reckless abuse of power and a slap in the face to countless New Mexicans. We have a moral responsibility to future generations that supersedes any ultra wealthy executive’s desire to line their pockets.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New Mexico
Martin Heinrich
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 890
Yes34%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align93%
Cross-party6%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Martin Heinrich
U.S. SenatorDemocratNew Mexico
SoupScore
Martin's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 55 sponsored · 281 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
“Simply put, our town cannot survive without gross receipts tax,” said Silver City Councilor Guadalupe Cano. “We don’t get gross receipts tax unless we get visitors here. Visitors come here for the Gila.”
More in Albuquerque Journal ⬇️
The existing Continental Divide National Scenic Trail serves as a major economic driver for communities along the trail and provides recreational access to incredible landscapes.
My bill will finally finish incomplete portions of the trail and make it easier and safer to access.
Last week, I met with veterans and advocates at the Veteran Integration Center in Albuquerque about how the DOGE chaos threatens veterans and veterans’ services. We owe our nation’s heroes more than gratitude, we owe them action and the quality of care they were promised.
From higher home insurance rates to skyrocketing utility bills, we’re already feeling the cost of climate inaction.
@schatz.bsky.social's Climate Change Financial Risk Act will help us make local economies more resilient for families, workers, and small businesses.
Agricultural producers and rural communities rely on the health of our land and water.
That's why I’m reintroducing my Agriculture Resilience Act. It sets a national goal of net-zero emissions in agriculture by 2040 through farmer-led, science-based initiatives.
New Mexico's national monuments are a balance of public land protections negotiated between local leaders, communities, and Tribes. They're treasured places that support a robust outdoor recreation economy. We strongly urge Secretary Burgum to leave our national monuments alone.
Reposted bySenator Martin Heinrich
It’s National Park Week!
DYK: In 2019, @heinrich.senate.gov helped designate White Sands a national park?
It’s one of his favorite places to go–and with entrance fees at all our national parks waived this week, it’s a great time to check it out for yourself.
Bad for school kids, bad for farmers, and sure as hell won’t “make America healthy again.”
In New Mexico, the Rio Chama, the Jemez, the Rio Grande, and the Pecos all benefit from the protections of Wild and Scenic designation.
The Gila and San Francisco Rivers deserve no less. I've introduced legislation to make sure these watersheds get the lasting protections they deserve.
Yesterday morning, I joined a group of students in Albuquerque to discuss our work to reduce gun violence & save lives.
One day later and another community is reeling from the devastation of gun violence.
We need action. Now.
There is nothing more rewarding than serving others. AmeriCorps taught me that. AmeriCorps members and volunteers respond to natural disasters, protect our wildlife, and contribute to communities all across our country.
It’s a service we should be building on instead of cutting.
Medicaid covers more than 780,000 people in New Mexico.
If Republicans get their way and cut one third of Medicaid’s funding, that means:
• 83,000 rural residents lose health coverage
• 95,000 children lose health insurance
• More than 1 in 5 seniors lose nursing home care
What this administration is doing to public education is a disservice to our kids and our teachers. The White House wants us to give up, but I'll never do that.
Today I spoke with educators in Rio Rancho and I’ll continue to hear from and fight for people in the trenches.
My deepest condolences to the families and loved ones of the two service members killed in yesterday’s tragic accident. Keeping the service member still in critical condition in my thoughts and hoping for a quick recovery.
Thank you to New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence, @everytown.bsky.social, @momsdemand.bsky.social, and @studentsdemand.bsky.social for joining me today and talking about how GOSAFE can help us save real lives.
We can save lives while protecting responsible gun ownership. My GOSAFE bill is how.
Today, @fernandez.house.gov and I met with Pecos community leaders to discuss our Pecos Watershed Protection Act. Pecos deserves clean water free from harmful mining pollution and we’ll continue to push for permanent protections to protect the Pecos River.
The Buffalo Tract is the wrong place for a gravel mine. It would decrease home values, diminish quality of life, and disregard its cultural significance.
We need to make the protections that local communities fought for permanent by passing my Buffalo Tract Protection Act.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History890 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
890 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-15 | 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) |
| 2026-03-26 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-26 | S. 1383 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-25 | S.J. Res. 103 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-03-25 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-25 | S.J. Res. 107 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-24 | S.J. Res. 116 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 116 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-24 | S. 1383 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | S. 1383 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-47) |
| 2026-03-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2026-03-23 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2026-03-22 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-37) |
| 2026-03-21 | S. 1383 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (41-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-21 | S. 1383 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (49-41, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-20 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (47-37, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-18 | S.J. Res. 118 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 118 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-17 | S. 1383 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2026-03-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-03-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2026-03-12 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-12 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (89-10) |
| 2026-03-11 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (82-11, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-11 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (84-10) |
| 2026-03-10 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (89-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-10 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (71-29) |
| 2026-03-09 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (68-28) |
| 2026-03-05 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-04 | S.J. Res. 104 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 104 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-04 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8) |
| 2026-03-02 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-6, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-02-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-33) |
| 2026-02-26 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-34) |
| 2026-02-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2026-02-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2026-02-24 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-02-12 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-02-12 | H.J. Res. 142 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-47) |
| 2026-02-11 | H.J. Res. 142 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-02-10 | S.J. Res. 95 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-51) |
| 2026-02-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2026-02-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination 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.