Donald Trump and Republicans cut funding for PBS to help pay for tax cuts for the wealthy.
In doing so, they cut an essential public service that millions of Americans rely on — including many in rural communities.
Another casualty of the Trump budget.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|California
Adam B. Schiff
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 783
Yes30%
No68%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align93%
Cross-party5%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Adam B. Schiff
U.S. SenatorDemocratCalifornia
SoupScore
Adam B.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 52 sponsored · 301 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Cutting funding for life-saving research has nothing to do with attacking antisemitism.
It has everything to do with attacking science, universities, and California.
And sadly, it is our health, our knowledge and our economy that will pay the price.
Donald Trump placed major tariffs on Brazil. Now he's sanctioning a judge.
But … why?
Answer: It has nothing to do with trade, unless you consider insurrection to be a new American export.
As families recover and rebuild from natural disasters - mortgage payment deadlines can make matters so much worse.
That's why I am introducing a bill with @bennet.senate.gov to give homeowners the financial support they need in times of crisis.
Donald Trump is trying to skip Senate confirmation altogether for some of his most dangerous nominees.
In his appointment of bitterly partisan U.S. Attorneys around the country, he's upending the justice system, eroding the rule of law, and making us all less safe.
youtu.be/ZWZSgR9QFrs?...
Some of the President's appointees are so extreme, even he doesn’t think they can get confirmed.
So Trump is doing an end run around the Senate & finding legally dubious ways to keep them in power.
These bad actors may carry out the president’s partisan agenda, but they will not make us more safe.
Attacking the science does not change the science.
But it does make us less prepared to confront the crisis.
Just step outside and feel the heat. Their denial is dangerous and absurd.
Republicans just voted to confirm Emil Bove.
Despite whistleblowers confirming he urged them to ignore court orders.
Despite it being clear he lied to the Judiciary Committee.
And despite the danger he poses to the rule of law.
The corruption of the bench continues.
Donald Trump is trying to rig the 2026 election.
And Republicans in Texas are rushing to help him.
Democrats need to fight fire with fire.
youtu.be/fR2PBZGgxTg?...
Two more tragic mass shootings this week.
On Monday, several Californians were the victims of a shooting in Reno. And then, the additional tragedy in New York City.
My heart goes out to the family and friends of the victims during this unimaginably difficult time.
Long before Project 2025 – there was a different playbook for turning a democracy into an autocracy.
Let's talk about Viktor Orbán and Hungary.
youtu.be/5bKz8vX2T44?...
Children are starving. Civilian deaths continue to mount. Hostages are still held.
Today I led 43 of my Senate colleagues in demanding the State Department work urgently to end the humanitarian disaster in Gaza.
This cannot continue.
What will come out next about Bove?
That's precisely the problem with this disaster of a nominee.
And why Senate Republicans are rushing through his nomination.
Before more disqualifying information can come out.
“I think it would be incredibly dangerous for someone like that to have a lifetime appointment as a federal appellate judge."
The latest whistleblower's words, not mine.
I agree.
Now, ANOTHER whistleblower has provided "substantive, internal DOJ documents to the Inspector General" supporting Reuveni's damning allegations.
www.cnn.com/2025/07/27/p...
I pressed Bove on this at his nomination hearing. Here was his disqualifying answer.
Republicans discounted Reuveni's detailed complaint. They tried to cast doubt on it.
Then Reuveni provided extensive emails, documents, and text messages to the committee that backed up what he said.
Then, former DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni blew the whistle, sharing that Bove told DOJ attorneys to consider telling the courts ‘f**k you’” if they ordered a halt to any of his deportation efforts.
www.nytimes.com/2025/06/24/u...
Bove, Trump’s former personal defense attorney, has been nominated for a position on the court of appeals.
While at DOJ, he worked to reshape the department to carry out the president’s dirty work. To dismiss cases against his allies and take aim at his enemies list.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History783 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
783 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-44) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-40) |
| 2026-02-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-40) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (71-29, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 4287) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (58-42) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (58-42) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (67-33) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (32-67) |
| 2026-01-29 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-55, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-27 | S. 3627 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Final passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Bill Passed (82-15) |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (85-14, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-14 | S.J. Res. 98 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 98 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Well Taken (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2026-01-13 | S.J. Res. 84 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-01-12 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (80-13, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-40) |
| 2026-01-08 | S.J. Res. 98 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 98 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2026-01-07 | S.J. Res. 86 (119th) | Begin consideration | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion to Proceed Rejected (43-50) |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2026-01-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-35) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-42) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-35) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (58-36) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S.J. Res. 82 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (50-50) |
| 2025-12-17 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (71-29) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (69-27) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | S. 1071 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | YES | ✕ | Motion Agreed to (77-20) |
| 2025-12-15 | S. 1071 (119th) | End debate | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-20, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 1071 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | YES | ✕ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (75-22) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 3385 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 3386 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-10 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-12-10 | S.J. Res. 82 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-49) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-12-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-12-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (57-32) |
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.