In addition to raising gas prices, Pres. Trump's reckless economic policies are:
Taxing Americans with blanket tariffs that increase costs
Reducing access to affordable health care
Undermining retirement security
Making it harder for people to secure a middle-class life
Polluting air & water
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Rhode Island
Jack Reed
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 840
Yes34%
No65%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align94%
Cross-party5%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Jack Reed
U.S. SenatorDemocratRhode Island
SoupScore
Jack's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 38 sponsored · 171 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Reposted byU.S. Senator Jack Reed
@reed.senate.gov blasts President Trump for calling dyslexia as a “mental disability” in attempt to taunt California Governor Gavin Newsom: “Trump’s hurtful, ignorant comments were offensive and wrong. Instead of taunting people with learning differences, he should educate himself and apologize."
House Republicans want to shut down TSA & DHS rather than pass a bill supported by every Senate Republican. Make no mistake, GOP controls every branch of gov’t. They're prioritizing Trump’s chaotic, violent & over-aggressive ICE raids over reopening DHS & real homeland security.
Pres. Trump’s national security advisers warned him that attacking Iran could shut down the Strait of Hormuz. He did it anyway.
Now the White House is scrambling to reopen it while our economy takes a hit, oil prices surge, and Trump's war expands.
Pres. Trump & Republicans control the White House & both chambers of Congress. They’ve orchestrated this prolonged shutdown.
It won’t end until GOP does the right thing & demands that Trump stops punishing federal workers & puts the safety of Americans first.
Senate Republicans have another opportunity today to join Democrats, immediately fund TSA, & put an end to the chaos they’re fueling at our airports.
Hardworking TSA agents deserve their paychecks.
Senate Republicans need to stop blocking Dems & start voting to immediately fund TSA.
Leading efforts to offer up hope to patients & families who need bone marrow & cord blood transplants.
My bipartisan bill with Sen. Tim Scott would strengthen research, boost investments, & renew programs that help people w/ blood disorders & diseases find suitable donors.
Democrats have been clear all along. We want to immediately fund TSA, FEMA, Coast Guard, CISA & core DHS functions while negotiations continue to rein in ICE & CBP.
Senate Republicans have blocked us ELEVEN times.
Pres. Trump thinks mail-in voting is fine when he does it. He just doesn’t want you to have the same option.
Pres. Trump basically confessed on social media that he’ll continue denying paychecks for federal workers & forcing long lines at airports unless Congress enacts his unconstitutional so-called SAVE Act that gives Trump unprecedented control over U.S. elections.
As #Ramadan comes to a close, we join with people of all faiths in sending wishes of peace, hope, & togetherness to our Muslim friends & neighbors celebrating Eid al-Fitr. #EidMubarak to you and yours!
The so-called SAVE Act debate comes down to this:
Democrats are fighting to secure our elections & uphold the Constitution.
Republicans are actively cutting election security safeguards & trying to give Trump unprecedented power over elections in all 50 states.
NINE times.
So far, Senate Republicans have rejected NINE Dem bills to pay the Coast Guard, TSA, CISA, FEMA & other critical DHS functions while negotiations continue to rein in ICE & CBP.
Once again, Republicans blocked Dems’ attempt to immediately pay TSA workers.
As GOP play games that are negatively impacting travel & forcing long lines at our airports, Democrats won’t stop trying to pay our hardworking TSA agents.
UPDATE: For the seventh time, Republicans voted to block TSA agents, FEMA personnel, & other federal employees from getting their paychecks.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History840 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
840 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (55-44) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-45) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-46) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (77-23) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-38) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-35) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | YES | ✕ | Nomination Confirmed (80-17) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (78-20) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-42) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-42) |
| 2025-01-28 | H.R. 23 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-28 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | YES | ✕ | Nomination Confirmed (77-22) |
| 2025-01-27 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (97-0) |
| 2025-01-27 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (68-29) |
| 2025-01-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-23) |
| 2025-01-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-34) |
| 2025-01-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-39) |
| 2025-01-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-01-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (72-26) |
| 2025-01-22 | S. 6 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-21 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-01-21 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46) |
| 2025-01-20 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (99-0) |
| 2025-01-20 | S. 5 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (64-35) |
| 2025-01-20 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (75-24) |
| 2025-01-17 | S. 5 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-35, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-01-15 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-49) |
| 2025-01-15 | S. 5 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (70-25) |
| 2025-01-13 | S. 5 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-10) |
| 2025-01-09 | S. 5 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-9, 3/5 majority required) |
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 17 / 17