The latest EO ordering massive job cuts to federal agencies is yet another senseless move by two billionaires who have no clue what the federal government does or what it’s like for regular people who have to work every day for a living.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Washington
Patty Murray
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 825
Yes25%
No69%
Present0%
Not Voting6%
Party align98%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Patty Murray
U.S. SenatorDemocratWashington
SoupScore
Patty's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 35 sponsored · 166 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
There will be devastating consequences if RFK Jr. is confirmed. Senate Republicans need to show some courage, show some conscience, and say NO to a vaccine denier becoming our highest-ranking health official.
I've met with many cabinet nominees across many admins, and my meeting with RFK Jr. was by far the most troubling.
He rattled off debunked conspiracy theories & lied to my face—denying his own statements he'd made on record. We cannot confirm an anti-vaxxer as Secretary of Health.
The problem right now is that Trump and Elon Musk are effectively shutting down the government—whichever parts they don’t like—all on their own, without any regard for the law.
Elon doesn't decide if we fund our public schools or replace lead pipes—Congress does.
Trump's illegal EO to freeze EPA funds has created mass chaos & confusion—& it's hurting communities that need access to clean drinking water & affordable clean energy.
I'm demanding that Zeldin follow the law and disburse this funding with no exceptions. thehill.com/policy/energ...
Trump's ham fisted tariffs will just mean more inflation and fewer jobs. The truth is there is really no good reason for us to be picking fights with trading partners and close allies like Canada.
Parents & teachers need to know what's working for students. We learn so much of that through IES’s independent, high quality research & data.
But now a billionaire is shutting down this research and keeping parents in the dark—that's WRONG, and it's bad for students. www.npr.org/2025/02/10/n...
Musk's illegal & arbitrary cuts to NIH will dismantle biomedical research in America as we know it. Labs will shut down. Sick kids won't get the treatment they need.
Just because Elon doesn’t understand indirect costs doesn’t mean Americans should pay the price with their lives.
CFPB protects YOU! It has returned billions of dollars to working Americans who big banks and mega corporations cheated. Getting rid of it means more money in the pockets of billionaires—so it's no surprise the richest man in the world is leading the charge. www.cnn.com/2025/02/09/b...
Hard-working people who do so much for our country are being threatened with arbitrary layoffs because of the whims of the richest man in the world.
INCLUDING nuclear safety engineers at Hanford. How does that leave anyone better off?
Congress is meant to be a check on Presidential abuse of power—it’s the way our democratic system of checks & balances works.
It’s time for Republicans to say “enough” and stand with the people they represent and against the corruption & lawlessness we’ve seen from Trump & Elon.
Republicans' budget blueprint shows they are serious about eliminating the Department of Ed, cutting Medicaid and Medicare, and increasing wait times for veterans by slashing the VA. They are blindly following Elon Musk's lead rather than the American people's needs.
We have a new statement from CBPP President @sharonparrott.bsky.social on Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham’s proposed budget resolution, which presents an opaque and troubling plan with policy trade-offs that are purposely unclear: www.cbpp.org/press/statem...
This is what amounts to an ILLEGAL & indiscriminate funding cut for research centers everywhere. It will mean shuttering labs across the country, layoffs in red & blue states, and derailing lifesaving research on everything from cancer to opioid addiction.
We all need to speak out to save lives.
Whether it's air traffic controllers or cancer researchers, federal workers deserve better than being pushed out the door with a nine-day pressure tactic that comes with no clarity, no details, and a lot of questions left unanswered.
.@sanders.senate.gov and I are demanding answers from the Trump administration about what exactly is happening at the Department of Education. This former preschool teacher is not about to roll over and let Elon Musk destroy public education in America. thehill.com/homenews/edu...
Billionaires are not above the law—neither are Presidents.
We have a democracy—if we can keep it—and it's up to Congress to fight for the people we represent and defend the Constitution.
The federal government is not Twitter. It matters if Elon breaks things at the Social Security Administration. Musk has no clue what SSA employees do, nor does he care—it doesn't matter to him if you miss a Social Security Check. He belongs NOWHERE NEAR your Social Security.
I voted NO to advance Howard Lutnick as Commerce Secretary, Brooke Rollins as Secretary of Agriculture, and Kelly Loeffler as SBA Administrator—none of these nominees have convinced me they would stand up against Trump’s lawlessness and for our Constitution.
Tonight I voted NO to advance RFK Jr.'s nomination. He is a fringe conspiracy theorist and anti-vaxxer who is unqualified to lead HHS—and his dangerous views would have disastrous consequences for people's health and safety.
Tulsi Gabbard has parroted Kremlin talking points and shown a troubling tendency to side with dictators.
She would not stand up to Trump & Musk's lawlessness & cannot be trusted with our nation's intelligence. I voted NO to advance her nomination.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History825 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
825 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | Decision of the Chair PN12-19 and PN25-28 and PN12-45 and PN22-1 and PN22-2 and PN22-5 and PN22-27 and PN22-20 and PN22-21 and PN26-8 and PN26-34 and PN26-35 and PN55-41 and PN22-4 and PN22-8 and PN22-19 and PN26-1 and PN22-23 and PN25-40 and PN26-7 and PN26-19 and PN26-31 and PN60-3 and PN26-44 and PN25-2 and PN55-16 and PN60-9 and PN60-10 and PN129-8 and PN26-45 and PN141-37 and PN141-7 and PN141-28 and PN12-22 and PN25-21 and PN22-3 and PN26-22 and PN13-5 and PN22-24 and PN25-33 and PN141-18 and PN150-5 and PN345-16 and PN55-42 and PN54-6 and PN54-7 and PN55-45 and PN55-25 | YES | YES | ✓ | Decision of Chair Not Sustained (47-52) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | Motion to Reconsider PN55-25 and PN55-45 and PN54-7 and PN54-6 and PN55-42 and PN345-16 and PN150-5 and PN141-18 and PN25-33 and PN22-24 and PN13-5 and PN26-22 and PN22-3 and PN25-21 and PN12-22 and PN141-28 and PN141-7 and PN141-37 and PN26-45 and PN129-8 and PN60-10 and PN60-9 and PN55-16 and PN25-2 and PN26-44 and PN60-3 and PN26-31 and PN26-19 and PN26-7 and PN25-40 and PN22-23 and PN26-1 and PN22-19 and PN22-8 and PN22-4 and PN55-41 and PN26-35 and PN26-34 and PN26-8 and PN22-21 and PN22-20 and PN22-27 and PN22-5 and PN22-2 and PN22-1 and PN12-45 and PN12-19 and PN25-28 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Reconsider Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-16 | S. Con. Res. 22 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (36-62) |
| 2025-09-16 | S.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-47) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2025-09-15 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (51-44) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Decision of the Chair S.Res. 377 | YES | YES | ✓ | Decision of Chair Not Sustained (45-53) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Motion to Reconsider S.Res. 377 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Reconsider Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-10 | S. 2296 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-09-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-43) |
| 2025-09-04 | S. 2296 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-02 | S. 2296 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-14, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (71-23) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | — | — | Nomination Confirmed (72-22) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-35) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-42) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | YES | ✕ | Nomination Confirmed (78-17) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-19) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-41) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-43) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-44) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (81-15) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (21-75) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (15-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (14-81) |
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.