Sheldon Whitehouse headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Rhode Island
Born
October 20, 1955
Age 70
Phone
(202) 224-2921
Office
530 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Rhode Island

Sheldon Whitehouse

Voting Record — 890
Yes33%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align95%
Cross-party5%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Sheldon Whitehouse headshot
Sheldon Whitehouse
U.S. SenatorDemocratRhode Island
SoupScore
Sheldon's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 96 sponsored · 259 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

We just got even more evidence that American families are struggling under Trump’s economy. Fewer jobs, less wage growth, and people giving up on the job hunt altogether. And Trump couldn’t care less.
Breaking news: The U.S. economy added 57,000 jobs in June, less than expected. The unemployment rate ticked down to 4.2 percent, according to Labor Department data.
Creepy billionaires running the country from behind a captured Court is no way to celebrate the 250th anniversary of our great Republic. That is not what the Founders intended then, and it doesn’t serve We the People today.
We built defenses against this corruption, over decades. With those defenses pulled down by the extremists of this billionaire-built Court, it’s time for a jolt of democracy. It’s time to wake up. It’s time for major court reform.
This is their payday. A quick trip to the Oval Office, a big check to a superPAC, and presto! Everyone running the agency fired or brought to heel; agencies delivering results the corrupt donors want; a license for big money corruption.
They even funded academic hothouses (“think tanks”) to propagate self-serving legal doctrines for their Court like “major questions” and “unitary executive.” It’s nonsense, but it aligns perfectly with the goals of billionaire cheaters and polluters.
They even built a false narrative of an “administrative state” made up of “unaccountable bureaucrats” (heard that before?). In fact, agencies are highly accountable to Congress (CRA, e.g.), courts (APA, e.g.) and the president (appointees, e.g.).
Nobody wins except big polluters and economic cheaters who fear sensible and honest regulation, and prefer corrupt influence. That’s very, very few people, but they’re very, very rich, and they give very, very big money to Republicans.
Six extremists on the billionaire-built Supreme Court just upended that: ninety years of its own precedent, and over 100 years of practice, reliance and success. They think they know better, than Congress, the people, their own predecessors, and all fifty states.
Expertise helped them resist being tricked by industry. Independence (“quasi,” anyway) helped them resist corrupt influence. Bipartisanship steadied the ship. Yup, it worked. America became a global leader in regulated areas (securities and pharmaceuticals, e.g.).
For most of our American history, Congress set up agencies and commissions to deal with complex and specialized questions. We made them expert, independent and often bipartisan. Every single one of the fifty states has done the same at some point. It worked. 🧵
One year after the GOP passed the One Big UGLY Bill, the results are in: • 800,000 kids lost SNAP benefits. • 5M lost health coverage. • 1,000+ hospitals, clinics, nursing homes face cuts or closure. • Health care premiums doubled for millions. That's what they're celebrating.
The vast sums of dark, unaccountable money in our political system have shifted the balance of power toward corporate special interests and away from the American people. This ruling is a boon to the GOP and its billionaire donors and their ability to drown out the voices of the American people.
The Supreme Court strikes down longtime campaign finance rules, challenged by VP Vance that place limits on how much a national political party committee can spend in coordination with individual candidates.
Joined @reed.senate.gov to see progress on Westerly’s Tower Street Community Center today! We secured federal funding to build a new community hub that we hope Westerly residents will enjoy for a long time to come.
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
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-07-28Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-39)
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-07-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-48)
2025-07-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-07-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-47)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (48-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-47)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-47)
2025-07-23H.R. 3944 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-41)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (61-35)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-07-22H.R. 3944 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (91-7, 3/5 majority required)
2025-07-22H.R. 3944 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-48)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-21End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (44-43)
2025-07-17End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (46-36)
2025-07-17End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-34)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-31)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-40)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-43)
2025-07-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (51-48)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-51)
2025-07-17H.R. 4 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-47)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (47-50)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (47-52)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Send back to committeeYESYESMotion to Recommit Rejected (48-51)
2025-07-16H.R. 4 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-07-15H.R. 4 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-07-15H.R. 4 (119th)Motion to Discharge H.R. 4NONOMotion to Discharge Agreed to (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)

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 10 / 18Next →