Tina Smith headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Minnesota
Born
1958
Age 68
Phone
(202) 224-5641
Office
720 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Minnesota

Tina Smith

Voting Record — 890
Yes27%
No69%
Present0%
Not Voting5%
Party align98%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Tina Smith headshot
Tina Smith
U.S. SenatorDemocratMinnesota
SoupScore
Tina's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 44 sponsored · 315 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

A joyous day for Catholics across the globe, but especially those here in the United States who are seeing the first American Pope. I’m hopeful that Pope Leo XIV can continue the legacy of Pope Francis by encouraging selflessness, humility and service to the world’s poorest and most marginalized.
Making it harder for sick people to receive health care saves money... by keeping people sick. If they can't afford to go to the doctor, we don't have to pay for it. That's R's logic. Reality check: Cutting coverage doesn't cut sickness.
R's: We're going to cut Medicaid D's: People will lose their health insurance. R's: Liars! CBO: Actually, yeah, people will. A lot of people, in fact. Millions.
GOP Plans To Cut Medicaid Would Kick Millions Off Health Insurance, New Analysis Says

An authoritative analysis by Congressional Budget Office is House Speaker Mike Johnson's latest headache.

By Arthur Delaney
Reposted byTina Smith
One of the 100K+ people who lost their health insurance when Missouri slashed Medicaid in 2005 was a woman working a $6.70/hour McDonald’s job. Her ~$300/week pay put her over the stricter income limits despite supporting 3 kids. Now, congressional GOP are considering cuts that could be bigger...
If Congress cuts $880 billion from Medicaid, Missouri could face a yearly shortfall of $2 billion. An early 2000s budget gap of about $2.4 billion prompted the state to drop 100,000 people from Medicaid. kffhealthnews.org/news/article...
I’m prepared to fight with every tool at my disposal to stop this effort and to protect the Boundary Waters for future generations.
By including this language in their big budget bill, they have made it clear they don’t care about the science or the data, which shows unequivocally that this type of mining poses an unacceptable risk.
Republicans in Congress are trying to give a foreign conglomerate full permission to build a copper-nickel sulfide mine right on the doorstep of the Boundary Waters watershed and irreversibly pollute this pristine wilderness.
NEW LEGISLATION RISKS IRREVERSIBLE POLLUTION OF THE BOUNDARY WATERS 


House Republican legislation includes language to sell out the Boundary Waters to a foreign mining conglomerate
Energy Star has saved *half a trillion dollars* since it started, so this is only going to make you pay more for energy – and they know that. They know this will raise your costs, but it helps their buddies in the oil and gas industry, who donate big money to their campaigns.
Reposted byTina Smith
"I've been working on Social Security for 50 years. It's gone through wars and pandemics. It has never seen a threat like Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Frank Bisignano, the nominee to be commissioner. There's never been a more important time to speak up." - Nancy Altman
Republicans want to cut disability programs to give billionaires more tax breaks. Not on our watch. Disability rights are human rights. Period.
BREAKING: Republicans just installed a self-proclaimed ‘DOGE person’ to be in charge of your Social Security. Friendly reminder that Elon Musk, head of DOGE, said Social Security is a Ponzi scheme that should be eliminated.   Every Dem voted no.
Reposted byTina Smith
President Trump’s tariff taxes are raising prices and hurting small businesses.   We joined Beth Benike, owner of Busy Baby and MN Small Business Person of the Year, and small business owners from across the country to call for these reckless tariffs to be reversed.
Today is Missing and Murdered Indigenous Relatives Awareness Day, a time for us to pay tribute and demand justice. It should serve as a call to action for all of us to address the epidemic of violence against Native communities, especially women.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
890 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
2025-05-08S. 1582 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-49, 3/5 majority required)
2025-05-08H.J. Res. 60 (119th)Approve resolutionNOT_VOTINGNOJoint Resolution Passed (50-43)
2025-05-08S.J. Res. 7 (119th)Approve resolutionNOT_VOTINGNOJoint Resolution Passed (50-38)
2025-05-07S.J. Res. 13 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-47)
2025-05-06H.J. Res. 60 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-47)
2025-05-06S.J. Res. 7 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-47)
2025-05-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2025-05-06S.J. Res. 13 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-05-06H.J. Res. 61 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (55-45)
2025-05-05H.J. Res. 61 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-43)
2025-05-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-05-01S.J. Res. 31 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-46)
2025-05-01H.J. Res. 75 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-45)
2025-04-30S.J. Res. 31 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-40)
2025-04-30S.J. Res. 49 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (49-49, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-04-30S.J. Res. 49 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Defeated (49-49)
2025-04-30H.J. Res. 75 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-04-30H.J. Res. 42 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-46)
2025-04-29H.J. Res. 42 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNOYESNomination Confirmed (83-14)
2025-04-29End debateNOYESCloture Motion Agreed to (84-13)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-36)
2025-04-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (62-36)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2025-04-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-39)
2025-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (67-29)
2025-04-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (64-27)
2025-04-11Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-25)
2025-04-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-25)
2025-04-11Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-26)
2025-04-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-25)
2025-04-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-46)
2025-04-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-04-10H.J. Res. 20 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (53-44)
2025-04-09H.J. Res. 20 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-42)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-46)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-37)
2025-04-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2025-04-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-42)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-37)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-04-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (66-32)
2025-04-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (67-32)
2025-04-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2025-04-07End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-39)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)

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 14 / 18Next →