
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New Mexico
Martin Heinrich
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 830
Yes34%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align94%
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 · 44 sponsored · 253 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
My bipartisan Good Samaritan bill will allow Good Samaritans to help clean up abandoned mines that are threatening our communities. We had strong bipartisan support of the bill in committee. Next, it’s time for the Senate floor.
www.abqjournal.com/news/sen-hei...
I’m proud to welcome New Mexico’s $16.5M piece of the largest federal investment in American history to provide the support and housing that those experiencing homelessness need to get back on their feet.
www.abqjournal.com/news/new-mex...
Energy storage projects like this will make our electric grid more secure, reliable, and resilient, and they allow us to utilize more clean wind and solar power. This is how we will create a carbon pollution-free future.
www.bizjournals.com/albuquerque/...
Very glad to see the Pueblo of Isleta among the 15 Tribes and Tribal organizations to receive funding from the Indian Health Services to modernize small ambulatory facilities.
This is what growing the economy and building the middle class looks like, thanks to Democratic leadership.
Propane is not “a clean energy solution for everyone”. Because propane is not clean energy.
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024...
I fought to pass the Great American Outdoors Act to make a difference for New Mexico families. It’s met and exceeded expectations, including with the recent award of $850,000-plus for the Officer Daniel Webster Children’s Park in Albuquerque.
Always good to see our NM Attorney General and my friend, Raul Torrez.
Today was our Senate Fusion Caucus kick-off event. I’m excited to be leading and launching this bipartisan effort to support the pursuit of clean, limitless energy. Much thanks to the Senators, Congress members, experts, and staff who joined us today.
The rate of pedestrian-vehicle fatalities in New Mexico demands action. The Complete Streets Act is an opportunity to make unprecedented investments in roadway safety in our state and also pave the way for better, more accessible streets.
Rapid advancements in AI innovation are here. Now we need to establish and fund an AI Safety Institute to make sure those AI advancements are to Americans’ benefit, not harm.
nmpoliticalreport.com/quick-reads/...
Self-healing electric grids? Yes, please.
All thanks to the researchers at Sandia Labs.
newsreleases.sandia.gov/healing_grid...
New Mexico families deserve economic security, but child care costs remain too high to make that achievable. We need to permanently expand the Child Tax Credit to help families afford child care costs and give kids an opportunity to succeed.
Q: What’s good for teachers and great for students?
A: Achieving National Board Teacher Certification.
My resolution lifting up the importance of this PASSED the Senate last week.
Holtec is being fined millions of dollars in New Jersey for fraudulently and illegally claiming tax credits they weren’t due. And they want to be in charge of nuclear waste in New Mexico? No thanks!
www.nytimes.com/2024/01/30/n...
Privatizing the federal helium reserve has real impacts on our health and national security. I continue to urge the Biden Administration to consider these implications before finalizing this sale.
www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...
The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was one of my first votes in Congress. But what sticks with me to this day is how much her story reminded me of my mom, Shirley, and the challenges she faced working in a non-union wheel factory.
www.forbes.com/sites/hollyc...
Doña Ana County Sheriff Kim Stewart spends every day working to keep her community safe. That’s why it means so much to have her support of my new GOSAFE Act, the bill I introduced to help fight gun violence and save lives.
When an emergency happens, 911 dispatchers are the very first people to respond. We need to give these dispatchers the resources they need to work quickly and efficiently. Proud to join Senator Klobuchar’s Enhanced Emergency Reporting Act to get this done.
There’s more work to do, but this is certainly good news. www.washingtonpost.com/business/202...
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History830 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
830 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 233) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (24-76) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 776) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 925) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 130) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Klobuchar Amdt. No. 494) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 454) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-49) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-02-18 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-02-18 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-02-18 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (72-28) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2025-02-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2025-02-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (55-44) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-45) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-46) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (77-23) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
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.