‘Contracts for deed’ target families that face barriers to obtaining a traditional mortgage.
They skirt consumer protection laws, so families get saddled with high fees and few protections if they fall on hard times.
What makes it even worse – they target communities of color.
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
15 recent posts · 39 sponsored · 193 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Minnesota has a large and diverse East African community where families work hard to build a life in this country.
Stellar reporting uncovered abusive practices by lenders targeting my constituents.
https://www.propublica.org/article/how-contracts-for-deed-put-families-at-financial-risk
Owning a home is part of the American dream – it’s a ticket to building wealth and getting your family on some financially solid ground.
But bad actors take advantage of Americans’ dreams of homeownership – especially in Black and Brown communities.
Let’s talk about it...
He’s endangering our national security because he doesn’t think the women who defend our freedom deserve their own – shameful.
For the first time in over 100 years, the Marine Corps won’t have a Senate-confirmed leader.
Why?
Because Senator Tommy Tuberville is blocking the nominee (along with hundreds of others) because of a Defense Department policy allowing women in the military access to abortion.
Drews, a member of the Leech Lake Band, developed Native Teaching Aids to teach the Ojibwe language, culture, history and imagery through games ranging from puzzles to board games.
Drews’ work helps to preserve and revitalize the Ojibwe language for future generations.
Tony Drews’ great-grandmother was forced into a boarding school where she was forbidden from speaking Ojibwe, her Indigenous language.
His father was beaten when he spoke Ojibwe in school.
Today, Drews creates games to keep the Ojibwe language alive.
https://t.co/jMHQ9vu1z5
The Red River Women's Clinic is a testament to our resiliency in the Midwest.
Republicans will keep trying to restrict our access to reproductive care, but we're still standing.
Minnesotans take care of one another – and that includes making sure women get the care they need.
Since reopening, they’ve seen a large rise in patient load. Minnesota is one of the few abortion havens in the Midwest, forcing women to travel hundreds of miles to get the care they need…
…and that’s just for those who can afford gas, childcare, time off, and a hotel.
For 25 years, Red River Women’s Clinic not only served as North Dakota's only abortion provider – but also many residents’ primary source of reproductive health care.
When Roe was overturned, they were forced to move across the river to Minnesota, where abortion remains legal.
Republicans do everything they can to avoid saying the quiet part out loud: they want a national abortion ban.
Minnesota is a safe haven for abortion in the Midwest – I visited a clinic on the border to hear what providers are seeing.
Here’s what I learned…
Solidarity ✊
Usually though, you can find me out in the community listening to and learning from Minnesotans – because I believe those closest to the issues have the best ideas.
If you’re a fan of uplifting working families (and occasionally calling out my colleagues), give me a follow!
Now, I represent the great state of Minnesota in the United States Senate.
You can find me sporting my trusty pair of Converse, hiking and birdwatching up on the North Shore of Lake Superior, or scoping out the best donut shop.
Ope, I guess I should introduce myself!
My name is Tina Smith and I believe politics is about one thing: improving people’s lives.
I started out as an organizer in Minnesota while raising our two kids, then as an executive for Planned Parenthood (I’m the only sitting Senator to have worked there)
← Newer postsPosts page 79
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-22 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (98-0) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S.J. Res. 114 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (46-51) |
| 2026-04-21 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2026-04-20 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (47-46) |
| 2026-04-16 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-48) |
| 2026-04-16 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 138 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (36-63) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 32 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (40-59) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 123 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 123 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2026-04-13 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2026-03-26 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-26 | S. 1383 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-25 | S.J. Res. 103 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-03-25 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-25 | S.J. Res. 107 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-24 | S.J. Res. 116 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 116 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-24 | S. 1383 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | S. 1383 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | — | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-47) |
| 2026-03-23 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2026-03-23 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2026-03-22 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-37) |
| 2026-03-21 | S. 1383 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (41-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-21 | S. 1383 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (49-41, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-20 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (47-37, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-18 | S.J. Res. 118 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 118 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-17 | S. 1383 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2026-03-17 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-03-17 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2026-03-12 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-12 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (89-10) |
| 2026-03-11 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (82-11, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-11 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (84-10) |
| 2026-03-10 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (89-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-10 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (71-29) |
| 2026-03-09 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (68-28) |
| 2026-03-05 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-04 | S.J. Res. 104 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 104 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-04 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8) |
| 2026-03-02 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-6, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-02-26 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-33) |
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.