Among the stories coming out in the aftermath of the violence in Traverse City this weekend: the bravery of bystanders, simply shopping on a summer day, stands out to me. (1/3)
www.cnn.com/2025/07/27/u...
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Michigan
Elissa Slotkin
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 830
Yes35%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align92%
Cross-party8%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Elissa Slotkin
U.S. SenatorDemocratMichigan
SoupScore
Elissa's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 21 sponsored · 120 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
No issue in Washington is more polluted by lobbyists and corporate PACs than healthcare. It's why our system is broken.
I’m one of six U.S. senators who don’t take corporate PAC money. Six out of 100. It should be 100 out of 100. Ban corporate PACs.
We are a nation of immigrants. I’m standing here today because my great-grandfather left fear of persecution and death at 13 years old and found a place in America.
After the unthinkable in Traverse City, Michiganders did what I have come to expect when there’s a crisis: the community started stepping up for each other.
If you or someone you know needs support, the Northern Lakes Community Mental Health Crisis Line is open and staffed. Call 833-295-0616.
This week in our Intel Briefing, we go deep on three things that impact you:
1️⃣ The threat of a politicized FED
2️⃣ How President Trump is pushing disaster relief onto the states
3️⃣ The threat of partisan gerrymandering
youtu.be/BuM2fzrmgzY
We need four million housing units built in our country.
We have 17 different programs doing job training. It’s broken.
The cost of living is too high in America, and it’s keeping hard-working people out of the middle class. That’s why I co-sponsored the Price Gouging Prevention Act.
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
Continuing a long running tradition, Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Holly) gave her maiden speech on the Senate Floor on Wednesday, using her first formal remarks to the chamber to lay out her plan to deliver for Michigan’s middle class. @michiganadvance.com
michiganadvance.com/2025/07/23/s...
I have a responsibility to chart the path through the dark tunnel and into the light, not by just complaining that it’s all bad, but by charting a strategy from beginning to end.
I join all Michiganders in praying for the recovery of the victims of this truly heinous act of violence in Traverse City. While we’ll learn more in the coming days, I thank the first responders and law enforcement officers who apprehended the suspect and are still working hard to save lives.
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) grills Christopher Fox, the intelligence community inspector general nominee, over President Trump trying to distract the public from the Epstein files by attacking President Obama.
"My ten-year-old nephew understands that was a distraction."
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
SEN. SLOTKIN: “.. If they’re going to go nuclear, then so am I. .. They’re forcing us into this position because they’re trying to pick their voters.”
@apnews.com
apnews.com/article/redi...
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
Senator Elissa Slotkin delivered a powerful maiden speech in the U.S. Senate, framing it as her "love letter to Michigan." as she vowed to restore Michigan's shrinking middle class. Her impactful address, a promise to always serve her state, earned her a standing ovation on the Senate floor.
When our water is threatened, it’s not just a health issue, it’s a security issue.
Cost of living and the economy: THAT is the driving issue for the middle class. It's just not driving the conversation among political elites.
If you want to understand why our system isn’t working, it’s because the American people feel like the American dream isn’t working.
Today at a Homeland Security Committee hearing, the senior most advisor to Tulsi Gabbard couldn't give me a good answer for why they just happened to publish a report about Barack Obama the *same day* President Trump was named in the Epstein Files.
The next 100 years are going to be either dominated by the United State of America or by China. And while we make mistakes, I will take American leadership over Chinese leadership any day of the week.
When people feel like they can’t get ahead, when they can’t provide for their kids what was provided for them, they feel anger.
In a multiracial, multiethnic experiment in democracy, people end up blaming people who don’t look like them, speak like them, or pray like them.
This is welcome news and a big step for those still recovering from the once-in-a-generation ice storm in N. Michigan and the UP in March. There is still more work ahead, but my office is here to help Michiganders navigate the disaster process to rebuild.
www.uppermichiganssource.com/2025/07/23/w...
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History830 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
830 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (5-94) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-48) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | S.J. Res. 26 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 26 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (15-83) |
| 2025-04-03 | S.J. Res. 33 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 33 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (15-82) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | H.J. Res. 24 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (53-42) |
| 2025-04-02 | H.J. Res. 24 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-04-02 | S.J. Res. 37 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-48) |
| 2025-04-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-04-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-04-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-03-31 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-42) |
| 2025-03-27 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-03-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-03-27 | S.J. Res. 18 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-48) |
| 2025-03-26 | S.J. Res. 18 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-03-26 | H.J. Res. 25 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Joint Resolution Passed (70-28) |
| 2025-03-26 | H.J. Res. 25 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-44) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-44) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (73-25) |
| 2025-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-31) |
| 2025-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (62-30) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (63-32) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (64-33) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (54-46) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (27-73) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52, 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.