Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Republican|Mississippi
Cindy Hyde-Smith
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 772
Yes75%
No24%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align99%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Cindy Hyde-Smith
U.S. SenatorRepublicanMississippi
SoupScore
Cindy's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 38 sponsored · 180 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
The fear and violence that President Trump has unleashed on our home is destroying any sense of public safety.
The Administration needs to put an immediate end to “Operation Metro Surge”.
Republicans will say they can’t help you afford health insurance because of the national debt, then turn around and spend all your tax money on anything and everything EXCEPT health care
Bookmarking this to use whenever Republicans tell me how much they care about the national debt
In an unfortunate but completely predictable turn of events, they managed to mess up a good thing.
An A+++++ economy doesn’t have layoffs reaching the same levels as the Great Recession
Shoutout to @repilhan.bsky.social, a strong woman who refuses to be bullied by Trump. Obviously there’s something wrong with him.
Shoutout to @repilhan.bsky.social, a strong woman who refuses to be bullied by Trump. Obviously there’s something wrong with him.
Letting AI decide whether or not you can get the treatment your real-life doctor thinks you need? Nobody is asking for this. It's an irresponsible dangerous gamble by the Trump Administration.
Amy’s right. AI can be a game-changer – but we still need some basic protections like any other product.
AI holds immense promise, but it also enables scams and deepfakes that harm Americans. States are leading with responsible safeguards. President Trump’s executive order threatens to override them.
We should not undo the few protections Americans have.
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/09/o...
A package that passed out of the Senate Banking, Housing Committee UNANIMOUSLY, mind you!
Yet House Republicans just killed the first comprehensive (and bipartisan!!) housing package of the last few DECADES
BUT THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO!!!!!
Leave it to House Republicans to fumble a comprehensive, bipartisan housing package that passed out of the Senate committee UNANIMOUSLY!
Reposted byTina Smith
Trump claims he wants to lower housing costs, but his allies in the House just axed a bipartisan bill that UNANIMOUSLY passed the Senate to do just that.
If Republicans keep blocking legislation to cut housing costs, Democrats will pass it ourselves when we take back Congress.
I don’t normally read the comments, but these ones give me hope. I know we are all seeing a lot of hate toward our Somali friends and neighbors, but I wanted to share these.
I hope they bring a smile to your face like they did mine.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History772 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
772 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-16 | S. Con. Res. 22 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (36-62) |
| 2025-09-16 | S.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-47) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2025-09-15 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Resolution S.Res. 377 | YES | YES | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (51-44) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Decision of the Chair S.Res. 377 | NO | NO | ✓ | Decision of Chair Not Sustained (45-53) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Motion to Reconsider S.Res. 377 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Reconsider Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-10 | S. 2296 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-09-08 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-43) |
| 2025-09-04 | S. 2296 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-02 | S. 2296 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-14, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (71-23) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (72-22) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-35) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-42) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (78-17) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-19) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-41) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-43) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-44) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (81-15) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (21-75) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (15-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (14-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (45-50) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (42-53) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (44-51) |
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.