Elissa Slotkin headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Michigan
Born
July 10, 1976
Age 49
Phone
(202) 224-4822
Office
291 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Michigan

Elissa Slotkin

Elissa Blair Slotkin is an American politician and former intelligence analyst serving since 2025 as the junior United States senator from Michigan. A member of the Democratic Party, she served in the United States House of Representatives from 2019 to 2025.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 789
Yes34%
No63%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align92%
Cross-party8%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Elissa Slotkin headshot
Elissa Slotkin
U.S. SenatorDemocratMichigan
SoupScore
Elissa's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 20 sponsored · 115 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Happy Veterans Day to all who served. From the veterans drafted into WWII, Korea and Vietnam, to those who put their hand up to volunteer since then, service is never easy, but it is so fundamental to keeping our country safe.
Since July, I have been clear. If you want my vote on a deal, it has to do something to bring down the cost of health care. Today, I joined @senatortammybaldw.bsky.social and @sanders.senate.gov to force a vote on a one-year extension of the healthcare.gov credits.
Like every Michigander, I grew up with the story of the Edmund Fitzgerald. How the ship was built in a Detroit shipyard. How it was once the “Pride of the American Side”, the biggest freighter on the Great Lakes at the time, a symbol of America’s manufacturing might. (1/2)
What’s clear is that the old way of doing business continues to fail America. Leadership is about changing and adapting when there is real need, and unless we hear that, we will fail to meet the moment. (4/4)
The promise of a vote in over a month does not meet that threshold. For me, this was never about politics or Beltway gamesmanship. President Trump’s ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ has plunged America into a health care crisis. (2/4)
Tonight, I am voting no on a procedural vote on an appropriations deal that would re-open the government. Since July, I have been clear: to earn my vote, Republicans would have to do something to bring down the cost of health care for working and middle-class Michiganders. (1/4)
People in DC may not care who pays the millions to keep this plant open unnecessarily, but Michiganders do — because the cost will eventually be passed on to ratepayers. The state had a plan. The Admin. decided to override it, to the tune of $4.3 million per week. www.mlive.com/environment/...
The Edmund Fitzgerald was a symbol of Great Lakes shipping, of Michigan industry, of American strength. Over the next few days leading up to the 50th anniversary of this story, I will be sharing some details about why this story lives on.
There is a lot going on this week. And in my Intel Briefing, I go deep on three important topics. 1️⃣ The shutdown, health care and court orders for the President to pay SNAP benefits. 2️⃣ My legislation, the No Troops in Our Street Act 3️⃣ Banning the Presidential pardon youtu.be/dxsGrndGoCA
And once the government opens up, we can work in a bipartisan basis on the needed reforms for any future extensions. President Trump and Republicans should take the deal. And if not, please come back with an offer that addresses the cost of health care.
For months, I have been clear: If you want my vote, we have to do something to address the cost of health care. We can open the government today with a simple, one-year extension of healthcare.gov subsidies to keep Michiganders' health care from spiking before Jan 1.
This is the longest shutdown in history. I am working to try and bring this to a resolution, but we need the President to get in the game. To be clear, I am insistent on fighting for people facing as much as a 600% increase in health care costs.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
789 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
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-44)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-41)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-44)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (81-15)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (21-75)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (15-81)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (14-81)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (45-50)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (42-53)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (44-51)
2025-08-01Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Points of Order Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 3114)YESYESMotion Rejected (44-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-08-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-41)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-41)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-38)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 34 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 34NOT_VOTINGYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (24-73)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 41 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 41NOT_VOTINGYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (27-70)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-07-30End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-49)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-44)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)

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 7 / 16Next →