I had *just* met with a big group of Syrian-Michiganders last week when the news of sanctions relief was announced. Now the Syrian diaspora, anchored by a strong and successful community in Michigan, is ready to help start a new chapter in Syria, and help support recovery and reconstruction there.
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 — 789
Yes34%
No63%
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 · 20 sponsored · 117 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Thank you to the federal law enforcement who prevented this attack. This is a reminder that the threat of terrorism on U.S. soil is very real, and protecting our bases in Michigan from hostile drone attacks in particular needs to be a priority. www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l...
Remember the exploding beepers?
Having access during the production of such a sensitive asset can have real consequences.
The idea that a foreign country would have access, as the buyer, during production, leaves it incredibly vulnerable to bugs, tracking devices, and whatever else they or other countries may attempt to manipulate.
On Air Force One, the president discusses sensitive intelligence and pending operations, makes critical decisions, and, as on 9/11, it's used as an emergency command and control center for urgent military decisions.
Beyond that, the sheer security risk of letting a foreign country deliver what is one of the most sensitive assets the U.S. has.
It was a serious and drawn-out investigation: files were seized, staff were questioned, and it took years to resolve. All for fear that a foreign government would have undue influence over a mid-level Pentagon official.
Now the President is taking a $400 million foreign gift.
Case in point: When I was at the Pentagon, I was the point of contact for the FBI as they investigated a mid-level official for accepting gifts, including allegedly a motorcycle, from Qatar, and failing to report them.
If any government official accepted a gift even a *fraction* as valuable as this, there would be a full investigation, and potential firings due to concerns of foreign influence.
Let's break down why this is a big problem. 🧵
abcnews.go.com/Politics/tru...
This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. No President should be able to line their own pockets by issuing their own cryptocurrency. michiganadvance.com/2025/05/09/s...
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
In a new interview, Elissa Slotkin talks to David Remnick about why Democratic leadership needs to focus their criticisms of the Administration on everyday economic issues—and the Party’s “sacred cows” that need to go.
For my second Intel Briefing, I wanted to break through the noise on three things that affect you:
1️⃣ Tariffs and the impact on our economy
2️⃣ Cuts to health care research
3️⃣ President Trump's bill that makes it harder to vote
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyWH...
We’ve got to do more to help our entrepreneurs and small businesses succeed. That’s what I am fighting to do with the Tax Relief for New Business Act.
The impact of a school shooting unfolds for years and years after the brief and violent moment of the shooting. The Gregory family offers us a window into the pain and devastation that ripples out for entire families. www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l...
The strong tradition of Catholic faith in Michigan has long been a point of pride. Now, it’s on display for the world! Pope Leo, the first American Pope, is not only a fellow midwesterner, but he also attended an Augustinian minor seminary in Western Michigan.
Negotiate in good faith, and we can get things done on this issue. No one has time for these games.
Instead, Republicans decided to play politics, changed the bill after the committee vote, and tried to ram a watered-down version through. In the end, Democrats and a few Republicans voted against this rushed version coming to the floor.
There was a bipartisan bill that was negotiated in good faith between Democrats and Republicans on the Banking Committee. The next stop should have been a vote on the bill on the Senate floor.
I voted NO to proceed on the GENIUS Act, which is a bill trying to put some guardrails on the cryptocurrency industry. A week ago, I was seriously considering it, but Republican leadership snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
Let's review what happened. 🧵
Stability in South Asia is incredibly important, not only for the people living there but also for the Indian and Pakistani diaspora in Michigan and across the world.
All parties involved should take action to de-escalate the situation and work toward peace and stability in the region. (2/2)
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History789 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
789 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-06-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-37) |
| 2025-06-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (72-26) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-28) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (59-36) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-37) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-06-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 89 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 89 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 87 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-45) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 87 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 88 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-44) |
| 2025-05-21 | H.J. Res. 88 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 55 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Sustained (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 55 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Sustained (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Motion to Adjourn S.J.Res. 55 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Adjourn Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Ten Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-52) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Fifteen Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Thirty Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for 60 Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Ninety Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Failed (46-52) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S. 1582 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (69-31) |
| 2025-05-19 | S. 1582 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (66-32, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-05-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-05-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-05-15 | S. Res. 195 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.Res. 195 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (45-50) |
| 2025-05-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-43) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-40) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-41) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (72-26) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-05-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-05-08 | S. 1582 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-49, 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.