Moose (Tina’s version): Why won’t the grandchild give me the bread?
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 — 840
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 · 189 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Private equity firms’ main focus when buying hospitals is not taking good care of patients. It’s maximizing their profit.
It’s throwing the people who rely on those hospitals and health care workers under the bus.
I asked Trump’s nominee for Treasury Secretary about all these giant corporations/private equity buying up hospitals, especially in rural areas, and closing them down because they’re not deemed profitable.
It seems he’s just fine with that model.
Tech billionaires are using the money to push their own interests – building lavish doomsday bunkers + buying up news outlets. Helping them amass MORE wealth + power is a far cry from a real solution to our problems. But that’s the plan for Trump’s Treasury nominee, a billionaire hedge fund manager.
The 2017 Trump Republican tax cuts have delivered massive consolidation of wealth at the top. The top 1% got a tax cut that was WAY bigger than the one that was received by working families in the country.
But that wasn’t enough.
They want to slash taxes for the wealthy and corporations again.
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.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History840 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
840 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (55-44) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-45) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-46) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (77-23) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Nomination Confirmed (59-38) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Begin consideration | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-35) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (80-17) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (78-20) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-42) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-42) |
| 2025-01-28 | H.R. 23 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-28 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (77-22) |
| 2025-01-27 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (97-0) |
| 2025-01-27 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (68-29) |
| 2025-01-25 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-23) |
| 2025-01-25 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-34) |
| 2025-01-24 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-39) |
| 2025-01-24 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (72-26) |
| 2025-01-22 | S. 6 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-21 | — | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-01-21 | — | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46) |
| 2025-01-20 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (99-0) |
| 2025-01-20 | S. 5 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (64-35) |
| 2025-01-20 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (75-24) |
| 2025-01-17 | S. 5 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-35, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-15 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-49) |
| 2025-01-15 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (70-25) |
| 2025-01-13 | S. 5 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-10) |
| 2025-01-09 | S. 5 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-9, 3/5 majority required) |
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.
← PrevPage 17 / 17