Edward J. Markey headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Massachusetts
Born
July 11, 1946
Age 79
Phone
(202) 224-2742
Office
255 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Massachusetts

Edward J. Markey

Edward John Markey is an American politician serving as the junior United States senator from the state of Massachusetts, a seat he has held since 2013. A member of the Democratic Party, he served 20 terms as the U.S. representative for Massachusetts's 7th congressional district from 1976 to 2013. Before that, he was a member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives from 1973 to 1976. When Senator Patrick Leahy retired in 2023, Markey became the dean of New England's Congressional delegation.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 789
Yes24%
No75%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align95%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Edward J. Markey headshot
Edward J. Markey
U.S. SenatorDemocratMassachusetts
SoupScore
Edward J.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 132 sponsored · 320 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

@massago.bsky.social knows exactly what’s in the Constitution. It’s why she’s led lawsuit after lawsuit against the Trump administration — the most lawless and corrupt administration in history. Like Massachusetts, she respects the rule of law.
Screenshot of headline reading: US attorney for Mass. slams Attorney General Andrea Campbell over ICE comments
It was an honor to have visited the Nova Exhibit in South Boston and have heard from survivors of the horrific October 7th attack. Onn, Noa, and Raz, thank you for sharing your stories. They are a reminder of the work ahead to end the violence and achieve lasting peace.
Senator Markey stands and speaks with a group of survivors at the Nova Exhibit.
One year on, the closure of Carney Hospital and Nashoba Valley Medical Center in Massachusetts has left neighborhoods in crisis—ambulance times up, care farther away, and trust broken. I’m working to rebuild our health system for everyone. commonwealthbeacon.org/the-codcast/...
Bad for Republicans? It’s bad for people like Jeff in Natick who will see the cost of his cancer treatment skyrocket to over $300,000 a year if we do not extend the ACA premium tax credits. That’s who we’re fighting for.

Alayna Treene
@alaynatreene
Trump at his breakfast with Senate Republicans in the White House State Dining Room:

"I thought we'd have a discussion after the press leaves about what last night represented, and what we should do about it. And also about the shutdown, how that relates to last night. I think if you read the pollsters, the shutdown was a big factor, negative for the Republicans"
America doesn’t have a food shortage—we have a justice shortage. Trump is illegally withholding $5.5 billion in food aid. It’s time to get food to families, fund our food banks, and stop this moral failure.
Jeff Sternick, a lung cancer survivor and Lung Association advocate from Natick, knows firsthand how premium hikes threaten access to affordable health care. We need to extend tax credits—not let Trump and MAGA Republicans rip them away.
Today, on the first-ever #USAIDDay, we honor decades of American compassion, courage, and global leadership. Trump may try to gut foreign aid—but he can’t kill compassion. The spirit of USAID lives on in public servants who believe America can still be a force for good.
97% of Bostonians have health insurance—and that means access to care, vaccines, cancer screenings, and peace of mind. MAGA Republicans want to rip that away with their cruel premium hikes. We won’t let them. Thank you, Dr.Ojikutu, for fighting for public health.
True or False? In 1977, Republicans in Congress helped pass a law granting Jimmy Carter king-like powers to impose tariffs on any good, from any country, for any reason? I’ll let you take a guess. This case is small businesses v. Trump—and Main Street must prevail.
Screenshot of headline reading: What's at stake in high-profile Supreme Court case on tariffs: ANALYSIS
At stake is whether the modern presidency continues an expansion of power.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
789 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
2025-08-02End 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 amendmentNOYESAmendment Agreed to (81-15)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Final passageNOYESBill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNOYESAmendment 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 nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination 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)
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)

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 7 / 16Next →