Jacky Rosen headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Nevada
Born
August 2, 1957
Age 68
Phone
(202) 224-6244
Office
713 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Nevada

Jacky Rosen

Jacklyn Sheryl Rosen is an American politician serving as the junior United States senator from Nevada since 2019. A member of the Democratic Party, she was the U.S. representative for Nevada's 3rd congressional district from 2017 to 2019.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 825
Yes38%
No61%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align90%
Cross-party10%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Jacky Rosen headshot
Jacky Rosen
U.S. SenatorDemocratNevada
SoupScore
Jacky's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 67 sponsored · 221 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Clean energy tax credits have generated billions of dollars of investment in Nevada. Republicans voted to repeal them – killing good-paying jobs in our state and raising families’ energy bills.
Senate Republicans just blocked @cortezmasto.senate.gov and my attempt to pass our bipartisan bill to repeal their misguided provision to unfairly tax gambling losses. I won’t stop fighting to reverse this harmful provision and protect Nevada’s gaming and tourism economy.
I’m fighting to change that – because every veteran exposed to toxins deserves access to the care and support they’ve earned, and they should have parity with their civilian counterparts. (4/4)
What’s more, civilian employees at the Department of Energy, working on the same sites already receive these benefits. So why are our servicemembers still being denied? (3/4)
But some veterans who served at classified locations within the Nevada Test and Training Range are being left behind – unable to prove their exposure to the VA and locked out of these benefits. (2/4)
Call it what you want, but cutting staff at the VA under the guise of “natural attrition” is still a reduction in force. Veterans WILL feel the impact – despite what VA leadership says. It’s a shameful disservice to those who have risked so much to serve our nation.
Congressional Republicans voted to kick millions of Americans off of their health insurance – including over 100,000 Nevadans. Those who need care the most will lose their access to Medicaid just so billionaires can get more tax cuts. Congressional Republicans should be ashamed.
According to a new report, Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans’ “Big Beautiful” Betrayal is projected to cut over $232 MILLION from rural hospitals in Nevada just so they can pay for more tax breaks for billionaires. (1/2)
Nevada already faces shortages of doctors and nurses, and Republicans’ cruel cuts to Medicaid will only make it more difficult to access care in our state. On top of kicking Nevadans off Medicaid, funding cuts will put more strain on hospitals and raise premiums for people.
Trump’s chaotic tariff policies are changing so quickly that no one can anticipate their full impact. How can small businesses in America thrive under these conditions?
Ending these protections is cruel and reckless. It shows the unconscionable lengths Donald Trump will go to push his extreme anti-immigrant agenda and rip families apart. (2/2)
TPS recipients from Nicaragua and Honduras fled devastation more than 20 years ago, and they have since built their lives in the U.S. — raising children, contributing to our economy, and enriching our communities. (1/2)
I’m devastated to hear about the loss of life and destruction caused by the floods in Texas. My thoughts are with all who were impacted, those who have lost loved ones, and the families of children who are still missing. I’m grateful to the first responders working tirelessly to save lives.
International visitors are crucial to our tourism economy in Las Vegas. Trump’s chaotic cost-hiking actions mean we get fewer tourists and our small businesses suffer.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
825 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
2025-02-21Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 776)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (51-49)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 925)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 130)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Klobuchar Amdt. No. 494)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 454)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-49)
2025-02-20End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-02-19Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-02-18S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47)
2025-02-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-02-18Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (48-45)
2025-02-13End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-43)
2025-02-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-02-13Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (72-28)
2025-02-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2025-02-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (55-44)
2025-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-45)
2025-02-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-46)
2025-02-04Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (77-23)
2025-02-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-38)
2025-02-03Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-01-30End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (83-13)
2025-01-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (62-35)
2025-01-30Confirm nomineeYESYESNomination Confirmed (80-17)

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 16 / 17Next →