These contracts are often designed to fail and have left Minnesotans financially ruined with no help.
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 — 851
Yes72%
No26%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align99%
Cross-party0%
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 · 39 sponsored · 193 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Late Friday, the CFPB quietly gutted the protections I fought to put in place for families exploited by predatory contracts for deed.
Vought called it a “compliance burden” — I’d like to know how letting unscrupulous sellers exploit people just trying to buy their own home is a “compliance burden.”
Putting a FedEx executive in charge of its competitor, the Postal Service, is exactly the kind of corrupt move we’ve come to expect from this Administration.
I was glad DeJoy left, but this guy seems hand-picked to gut USPS.
Not this mine. Not this place.
Reposted byTina Smith
When Trump took office, there was a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, hostages were being released, and aid was getting into Gaza. Now, none of that is true. The blockage of aid is causing a humanitarian crisis in Gaza and Israel is readying a long-term occupation of the Strip.
Reposted byTina Smith
This is a great illustration of why wholly unqualified extremists shouldn't be running essential government agencies.
@acyn.bsky.social
Can’t imagine if I went up to Duluth and said a slow port is a good thing.
A joyous day for Catholics across the globe, but especially those here in the United States who are seeing the first American Pope. I’m hopeful that Pope Leo XIV can continue the legacy of Pope Francis by encouraging selflessness, humility and service to the world’s poorest and most marginalized.
Today. Be there.
#SaveTheBWCA
Making it harder for sick people to receive health care saves money... by keeping people sick. If they can't afford to go to the doctor, we don't have to pay for it.
That's R's logic.
Reality check: Cutting coverage doesn't cut sickness.
R's: We're going to cut Medicaid
D's: People will lose their health insurance.
R's: Liars!
CBO: Actually, yeah, people will. A lot of people, in fact. Millions.
Reposted byTina Smith
These numbers are damning. Millions of Americans will lose health insurance if Republicans get their way.
Gee, who would’ve known they’re so blatantly corrupt…
Scoop: We've obtained internal cables showing how the U.S. government is pushing countries facing tariffs to clear way for Musk's Starlink
State Dept says it's good to encourage Starlink adoption
Others point to blurring of Musk's private/government roles ...
www.washingtonpost.com/business/202...
Reposted byTina Smith
One of the 100K+ people who lost their health insurance when Missouri slashed Medicaid in 2005 was a woman working a $6.70/hour McDonald’s job.
Her ~$300/week pay put her over the stricter income limits despite supporting 3 kids.
Now, congressional GOP are considering cuts that could be bigger...
I’m prepared to fight with every tool at my disposal to stop this effort and to protect the Boundary Waters for future generations.
By including this language in their big budget bill, they have made it clear they don’t care about the science or the data, which shows unequivocally that this type of mining poses an unacceptable risk.
Republicans in Congress are trying to give a foreign conglomerate full permission to build a copper-nickel sulfide mine right on the doorstep of the Boundary Waters watershed and irreversibly pollute this pristine wilderness.
Energy Star has saved *half a trillion dollars* since it started, so this is only going to make you pay more for energy – and they know that.
They know this will raise your costs, but it helps their buddies in the oil and gas industry, who donate big money to their campaigns.
Reposted byTina Smith
"I've been working on Social Security for 50 years. It's gone through wars and pandemics.
It has never seen a threat like Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Frank Bisignano, the nominee to be commissioner.
There's never been a more important time to speak up." - Nancy Altman
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History851 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
851 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-10-08 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-08 | S. 2882 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-08 | H.J. Res. 104 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-47) |
| 2025-10-07 | H.J. Res. 104 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-10-07 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-10-06 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-10-06 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-42, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-06 | S. 2882 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-03 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-44, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-03 | S. 2882 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-03 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-10-01 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-10-01 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-10-01 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-10-01 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (55-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-10-01 | S. 2882 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-30 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Defeated (55-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-30 | S. 2882 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Defeated (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-29 | S. 2806 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | YES | ✕↔ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (37-61, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-29 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-09-29 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-45) |
| 2025-09-19 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (47-43) |
| 2025-09-19 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (47-45) |
| 2025-09-19 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Defeated (44-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-19 | S. 2882 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Defeated (47-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-18 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | Decision of the Chair PN12-19 and PN25-28 and PN12-45 and PN22-1 and PN22-2 and PN22-5 and PN22-27 and PN22-20 and PN22-21 and PN26-8 and PN26-34 and PN26-35 and PN55-41 and PN22-4 and PN22-8 and PN22-19 and PN26-1 and PN22-23 and PN25-40 and PN26-7 and PN26-19 and PN26-31 and PN60-3 and PN26-44 and PN25-2 and PN55-16 and PN60-9 and PN60-10 and PN129-8 and PN26-45 and PN141-37 and PN141-7 and PN141-28 and PN12-22 and PN25-21 and PN22-3 and PN26-22 and PN13-5 and PN22-24 and PN25-33 and PN141-18 and PN150-5 and PN345-16 and PN55-42 and PN54-6 and PN54-7 and PN55-45 and PN55-25 | NO | NO | ✓ | Decision of Chair Not Sustained (47-52) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | Motion to Reconsider PN55-25 and PN55-45 and PN54-7 and PN54-6 and PN55-42 and PN345-16 and PN150-5 and PN141-18 and PN25-33 and PN22-24 and PN13-5 and PN26-22 and PN22-3 and PN25-21 and PN12-22 and PN141-28 and PN141-7 and PN141-37 and PN26-45 and PN129-8 and PN60-10 and PN60-9 and PN55-16 and PN25-2 and PN26-44 and PN60-3 and PN26-31 and PN26-19 and PN26-7 and PN25-40 and PN22-23 and PN26-1 and PN22-19 and PN22-8 and PN22-4 and PN55-41 and PN26-35 and PN26-34 and PN26-8 and PN22-21 and PN22-20 and PN22-27 and PN22-5 and PN22-2 and PN22-1 and PN12-45 and PN12-19 and PN25-28 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Reconsider Agreed to (51-47) |
| 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) | Approve resolution | 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) |
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.