Andy Kim headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from New Jersey
Born
July 12, 1982
Age 44
Phone
(202) 224-4744
Office
520 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New Jersey

Andy Kim

Voting Record — 890
Yes31%
No68%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align94%
Cross-party4%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Andy Kim headshot
Andy Kim
U.S. SenatorDemocratNew Jersey
SoupScore
Andy's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 42 sponsored · 281 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

I recently spoke with NephCure about their work on rare kidney diseases.   We need to increase access to early diagnosis and educate medical providers on the best treatments.   We should always think about how to increase access to care so all Americans can live healthy lives.
Very grateful to receive First Focus Campaign for Children's support for MediKids. This is a compelling case for why we need to act NOW to ensure all kids have healthcare — and coverage that addresses kids’ particular needs on pediatric, dental, vision, and behavioral care.
We don't have to guess anymore. They admitted it in court. It’s not a budget decision, it's the weaponization of government. This administration shows us time and time again they only care about one person — and that person only cares about himself.
Breaking News: Federal officials acknowledged in court documents that they canceled grants to states that didn’t vote for President Trump in 2024. nyti.ms/4gRd5Kb
Electrical transmission towers stand with hazy mountains in the background. A headline reads: "Trump Administration Admits Canceling Energy Grants to States That Did Not Vote for Him." Photo by Alex Welsh for The New York Times.
Did you know that 1 in 3 kids are underinsured? This means about 23 million kids' healthcare is unable to meet their needs.   MediKids solves this problem by guaranteeing comprehensive healthcare for EVERY child. It’s a no-brainer.
Given the lack of details, Trump contradicting his own team, and Saudi officials disputing him, I am a long way from being that confident this agreement is in the U.S.’s interest. 8/8
We need to ensure that an agreement bars enrichment of nuclear materials. The original announcement leaves open the possibility of enrichment in Saudi Arabia — which Trump now disputes. 6/8
I haven’t seen evidence of how Americans would benefit from this agreement. Trump appears to be responding to these concerns by adding conditions that the Biden administration sought — normalization with Israel. 4/8
The U.S. has long sought to ensure that such agreement with the Kingdom includes clear benefits for Americans and safeguards against abuses that could enable a nuclear weapons program. What I’ve seen so far raises questions about whether these conditions have been met. 3/8
This agreement is a serious piece of business that has major national security implications, but this administration is not treating it as such. 2/8
Details of the U.S.-Saudi civil nuclear deal the Trump administration reached are unclear. Less than a day after the administration announced a deal, Trump announced two major amendments that Saudis dispute. THREAD
I haven’t seen evidence of how Americans would benefit from this agreement. Trump appears to be responding to these concerns by adding conditions that the Biden administration sought — normalization with Israel. 4/8
The U.S. has long sought to ensure that such agreement with the Kingdom includes clear benefits for Americans and safeguards against abuses that could enable a nuclear weapons program. What I’ve seen so far raises questions about whether these conditions have been met. 3/8
This agreement is a serious piece of business that has major national security implications, but this administration is not treating it as such. 2/8
I love connecting with New Jerseyans at the Capitol and yesterday's Rutgers summer reception for students, internship supervisors, and alumni was no exception!   It's always a joy to hear how NJ students are spending their summers and what they're setting out to achieve.
Owning a home is out of reach, the average age of a first time homebuyer is 40. I'm proud the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act is now law – to help lower costs and put the American Dream of homeownership back within reach.
We can't just say what we're against. We have to say what we're for. That's why I introduced MediKids – it's my vision for the future of this country.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
890 total votes
ExpandCollapse

Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.

DateBillQuestionPositionParty MajAlign?Result
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-44)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-41)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-44)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (81-15)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (21-75)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (15-81)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (14-81)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (45-50)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (42-53)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (44-51)
2025-08-01Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Points of Order Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 3114)YESYESMotion Rejected (44-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-08-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-41)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-41)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-38)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 34 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 34YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (24-73)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 41 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 41YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (27-70)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-49)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-44)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)

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 9 / 18Next →