I’m standing with our government workers — on St. Paddy’s Day and every day. Elon Musk is not their boss.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Minnesota
Tina Smith
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 783
Yes24%
No71%
Present0%
Not Voting5%
Party align98%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Tina Smith
U.S. SenatorDemocratMinnesota
SoupScore
Tina's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 36 sponsored · 284 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Trump lets Musk run completely unchecked through our government, firing workers managing things like housing support and veterans care just so they can give themselves and their billionaire friends big tax breaks.
Tribal sovereignty is inherent—it predates the United States and is enshrined in treaties, federal law, and the U.S. Constitution. We won't stop reminding the Trump administration of these facts.
Thank you to the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council for having me today.
Reposted byTina Smith
Trump and Republicans set this up as an unprecedented power grab so they can slash and burn government services on their terms.
I’m a firm NO — on cloture and final passage — on this ‘CR’
Every time I talk to Postal Service workers, they say they don’t have enough workers to deliver all the mail on time. Make this make sense.
Elon and his minions need to stay the hell away from USPS.
Reposted byTina Smith
Millions of Americans need help finding shelter and keeping it.
The Trump administration is withholding $3.5 billion in approved funding from folks who need it most.
@smith.senate.gov and I are urging HUD to distribute those funds now.
Not to ruin everyone’s day, but don’t forget in the midst of this ‘CR’ chaos that they’re also trying to install a snake oil salesman (Dr. Oz) as head of Medicare and Medicaid.
Finance Committee questions him today.
Read my full statement here ⬇️
www.smith.senate.gov/u-s-senator-...
Trump and Republicans set this up as an unprecedented power grab so they can slash and burn government services on their terms.
I’m a firm NO — on cloture and final passage — on this ‘CR’
Project 2025 says fire federal workers, so they are.
Project 2025 says abolish the Department of Education, so they are.
Project 2025 says kick moms and babies off Medicaid, so they are.
Project 2025 calls for a national abortion ban using the Comstock Act… see where I’m going with this?
Doesn’t take a detective to uncover that Republicans are enacting Project 2025 – just last night they began dismantling the Dept. of Education.
Everything points to them misusing the Comstock Act to ban abortion even in states where it’s legal.
Today, I’m re-introducing a bill to stop them.
Reposted byTina Smith
Don’t tell me that Trump/Musk are not trying to destroy Social Security.
30,000 people died last year while waiting to get their benefits.
Under this new policy, those numbers will skyrocket.
We can’t kill seniors so that billionaires get their tax breaks.
Nothing to see here this is totally normal and happens all the time and isn’t weird at all and doesn’t signal any sort of corruption
He might as well grab a microphone and just shout “I CAN BE BOUGHT!”
Taking health care from moms and babies just doesn’t produce quite enough money to shell out to corporations and billionaires, so he simply MUST dip his paws into grandma and grandpa’s Social Security too.
The rich can never be too rich right?
“Golden Age” seems to be full of red… tell me again how this is supposed to make America great?
They’re doing their job because they love our public lands and want all of us to enjoy them.
Not waste.
Not fraud.
But this is definitely abuse to our NPS workers.
Park Rangers often uproot their lives and move their families to some of the most remote areas in our country, and this is how we repay them?
If you’ve ever met a Ranger (which I’m guessing Elon never has) you know they aren’t doing it because that’s where the money’s at.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | NO | 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 | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (80-17) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | YES | 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 | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-23) |
| 2025-01-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | 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 | NO | YES | ✕ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-10) |
| 2025-01-09 | S. 5 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | 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 16 / 16