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 — 830
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 · 38 sponsored · 187 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
All parties in this conflict need to move forward to end the violence.
Very welcome news out of the Middle East today.
Hopeful for a ceasefire, the return of hostages, humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza and safety and security in Israel.
Busy day in Washington — needed a big refuel that only a maple bacon donut could provide.
As it should be!
We just secured funding for ReConnect Rondo, a community-driven organization working to revitalize the Rondo neighborhood, to take the next steps needed to get the project ready for construction.
Another reason to be glad I didn’t go for dry January. Love you Vikings.
I’ve broken out the wine.
Here in Washington, one hour out and ready for the game — experiencing that mixture of anticipation and dread so familiar to all Vikings fans.
Every time I visit Rondo, I’m reminded of the strength, vision, and community spirit that define this neighborhood.
Their commitment to restoring what was lost is what makes this project so meaningful. I’m honored to support them on this journey.
The Rondo neighborhood is the center of St. Paul's Black community and lost more than 1,000 homes + businesses when I-94 was built. A land bridge over the interstate could address the historical harm caused by its construction.
And we’re one step closer to making that happen.
It's Postmaster General DeJoy's responsibility to provide reliable service in Minnesota.
He has a lot of work to do to fix these issues, and I won't stop pressing him until it's done.
When I asked postal leadership about this, they told me it was the first they heard of it.
These are the same people who repeatedly tell me everything is fine with service in Minnesota, and that their data would say if there were big disruptions.
This is beyond unacceptable.
Parts of Cook County, MN have gone without mail delivery since 2024.
People have been waiting for essential needs like prescriptions, Social Security checks, and more — and they were turned away when they tried to pick up their mail from the post office.
Wanted to share a video (w/ permission) of a mother and her two sons who were split up during the Afghanistan withdrawal who we were able to reunite in Minnesota.
Masouma and her sons have been separated for 3+ years. Seeing them together again warms my heart and brings tears to my eyes.
A little cold won’t keep me from sticking up for Minnesotans.
Beautiful service for a wonderful man. So thankful I was able to be here for it.
Rest in peace, President Carter.
I called for DOJ to investigate RealPage + other companies engaged in this practice in March 2023 with @warren.senate.gov, @markey.senate.gov and @sanders.senate.gov.
Glad to see more action taking on corporate landlords who illegally coordinate to reduce competition + inflate the cost of rent.
Artificially inflating rent is just wrong. When corporate landlords collude with each other and use algorithms to keep units empty and prices high, renters get stuck in a doom spiral of unaffordability.
But that’s exactly what these landlords do.
Upgrades will include making structural steel repairs and replacing deteriorated sections – and replacing sidewalks so we can all keep enjoying Park Point.
Between this and the complete replacement of the Blatnik Bridge, the future of Duluth’s infrastructure is bright.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-11 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (47-43) |
| 2026-06-11 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2026-06-10 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-44) |
| 2026-06-10 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-44) |
| 2026-06-10 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2026-06-09 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2026-06-08 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-42) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Budgetary Discipline Re: Lee Amdt. No. 5804) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (50-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Motion (Wyden Motion to Commit S. 2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with Instructions) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-51) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 1318 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (52-47) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schiff Amdt. No. 5740) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 5632) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (53-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (45-53) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Cassidy Amdt. No. 5812) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Coons Amdt. No. 5457) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Durbin Amdt. No. 5806) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Booker Amdt. No. 5803) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 5485) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5451) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | S. 2 (119th) | Motion (Warnock Motion to Commit S. 2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with Instructions) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kim Amdt. No. 5545) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 5501) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (51-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Graham Amdt. No. 5779) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 5556) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hassan Amdt. No. 5535) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | S. 2 (119th) | Motion (Ossoff Motion to Commit S. 2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with Instructions) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 5514) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 5512) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (53-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Tillis Amdt. No. 5452) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (15-84) |
| 2026-06-04 | S. 2 (119th) | Motion (Schumer motion to commit S.2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with instructions) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-50) |
| 2026-06-03 | S. 2 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2026-06-03 | S.J. Res. 188 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-53) |
| 2026-06-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2026-06-02 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2026-06-02 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2026-06-01 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2026-05-20 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-47) |
| 2026-05-19 | S.J. Res. 185 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 185 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-05-19 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-05-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Nomination Confirmed (52-38) |
| 2026-05-19 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-38) |
| 2026-05-18 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (46-43) |
| 2026-05-14 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 141 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-50) |
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.
Page 1 / 17Next →