Since coming to Congress, I’ve met with farmers all across my district to hear their concerns for the future, where they’ve expressed anxiety over their finances, upended by rising costs and an economic crisis caused by the Trump Administration’s senseless tariff war.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Democrat|Virginia District 4
Jennifer L. McClellan
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 496
Yes41%
No58%
Present1%
Not Voting0%
Party align100%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 4
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Jennifer L. McClellan
U.S. RepresentativeDemocratVirginia District 4
SoupScore
Jennifer L.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 22 sponsored · 138 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
As the #1 private industry in the Commonwealth, Virginia boasts a large agricultural sector. We rely heavily on our farms, 90% of which are family-owned, to keep families fed and ensure our local economies and communities thrive.
Here’s why the Republican Farm Bill fails to deliver for farmers 🧵
Reposted byRep. Jennifer McClellan
Last night, House Republicans chose a $70 billion blank check to ICE and CBP over ending the DHS shutdown.
Read New Dem Leadership's full statement.
Watch my full remarks here with @energycommerce.bsky.social:
As Trump’s war with Iran spikes energy costs, Republicans have focused on stripping investment from renewable energy that could help us combat this crisis.
Today’s Energy Subcommittee hearing focused on meeting exploding demand affordably is a day late and a dollar short. We can and must do more.
The vast majority of Americans across the political spectrum do not want FISA to be reauthorized in its current state.
I oppose authorization without reforms to protect privacy rights and civil liberties from an Administration that seeks to weaponize these tools to target its political enemies.
The language of the Fourth Amendment clearly protects the people from unreasonable searches and seizures. Instead of upholding our constitutional rights, Speaker Johnson chose to bend the knee to the Trump Administration’s goals of conducting widespread, unchecked surveillance of the public.
I voted no because the bill fails to provide critical measures to stop the widespread surveillance of Americans’ private communications data and does nothing to stop the ongoing abuse of FISA.
Despite opposition from both sides, Speaker Johnson sought to jam a three-year reauthorization through the House without any reforms to protect Americans’ privacy.
Last week, he tried to force a five-year reauthorization for a vote and failed on a bipartisan basis. Today, he tried again.
Protesters, journalists and government officials have been subjected to searches that violate the intent of the legislation.
Additionally, loopholes and a lack of privacy legislation allow agencies to purchase data and conduct searches without warrants, circumventing the Fourth Amendment.
When Congress enacted Section 702 of FISA in 2008, lawmakers intended to expand the government’s ability to conduct surveillance on suspected foreign terrorists.
Since then, Section 702 has been exploited to spy on American citizens.
Today, the House voted to reauthorize Section 2 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
I voted no. Here’s why 🧵
I condemn all efforts to roll back the progress we have made over the past century. These attacks cannot go unchecked.
I’ll continue working to pursue all avenues to defend the protections that allowed millions of people, including my family, to exercise their right to participate in our democracy.
I’ve fought to expand voting rights for decades, championing legislation in 2021 that made Virginia the first state in the South to adopt its own Voting Rights Act.
Now, we must continue to stand against new challenges to these efforts, and Congress must act to restore the VRA protections gutted.
Today’s ruling makes it nearly impossible to ensure minority voters have a fair opportunity to elect the candidate of their choice.
These attacks pull us farther away from the ideals upon which our nation was founded and undermine progress to achieve a government by, of and for the people.
While Louisiana v. Callais upholds the constitutionality of Section 2, the conservative majority of the Supreme Court leaves it powerless to address racial discrimination.
This blow is the latest step in theeir campaign to erode the VRA, beginning with the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder decision.
My family has felt the weight of voter suppression for generations. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) changed that for the better when Section 2 banned such voting practices that discriminate on the basis of race or language.
When my great-grandfather registered to vote, he was forced to take a literacy test and find three white men to vouch for his character.
My father and grandfather were forced to pay poll taxes to register to vote.
Today, SCOTUS released a 6-3 decision that guts Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and opens the door for a new wave of unbridled racial gerrymandering.
Here’s why this is personal for me and so many others across our country 🧵
Despite the chaos in Washington with the ongoing war in Iran and the continued partial government shutdown, the House unanimously passed one of my bills, and we continued to hold important hearings on the Energy & Commerce Committee.
Check out what you missed in my latest newsletter.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History496 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
496 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-10 | H.R. 3838 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Agreed to |
| 2025-09-09 | H. Res. 682 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-09 | H. Res. 682 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-08 | H.R. 3425 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-08 | H.R. 3424 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.R. 4553 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.J. Res. 105 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.J. Res. 106 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-04 | H.J. Res. 104 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-03 | H. Res. 539 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-03 | H. Res. 672 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-03 | H. Res. 672 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-02 | H.R. 747 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-09-02 | H.R. 4216 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-23 | H.R. 4275 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-23 | H.R. 3357 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-22 | H.R. 1917 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-22 | H.R. 3937 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-21 | H.R. 3351 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-21 | H.R. 3095 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-07-18 | H.R. 4016 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-18 | H.R. 4016 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-07-18 | H.R. 4016 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-07-18 | H.R. 4016 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-07-18 | H.R. 4016 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-07-18 | H.R. 4016 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-07-18 | H.R. 4016 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-07-18 | H.R. 4016 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-07-18 | H.R. 4016 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-07-18 | H. Res. 590 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-18 | H. Res. 590 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-17 | H.R. 1919 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-17 | S. 1582 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-17 | H.R. 3633 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-17 | H. Res. 580 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-07-16 | H. Res. 580 (119th) | Motion to Reconsider | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
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.