Today’s vote is just one more data point showing the American people that Republicans are inexplicably hostile to their own constituents having high-quality health care.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Rhode Island
Sheldon Whitehouse
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 783
Yes31%
No65%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align95%
Cross-party4%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Sheldon Whitehouse
U.S. SenatorDemocratRhode Island
SoupScore
Sheldon's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 87 sponsored · 213 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Someone who gets a cancer diagnosis needs good, affordable insurance that pretty much covers their treatment – not $1,000 in a health savings account plus pricy junk health insurance that leaves them on the hook for massive bills.
The Republican "alternative" to Democrats’ cost-lowering plan doesn’t lower costs at all.
Republicans refused to make good on their commitment to work in a bipartisan way to lower skyrocketing premiums.
Now, they own the massive fiscal disaster that is about to hit their constituents – health care premiums will double in a matter of weeks. 🧵
Wishing my colleague @amo.house.gov a very happy birthday today!! 🎂🎂🎂
Reposted bySenator Sheldon Whitehouse
MAGAZINER: How many veterans have you deported?
NOEM: We haven't deported veterans
MAGAZINER: We are now joined on Zoom by a combat veteran you deported to Korea
Revolution Wind “stop work” order already struck down, as unlawful. Trump DOJ declined to appeal.
Now the underlying executive order struck down, as unlawful.
Unlawful political services to fossil fuel industry donors is a recurring Trump behavior.
The campaign corruption case just argued in the Supreme Court attracted a flotilla of creepy front groups who filed “amicus” briefs — 15 of them by our count!
The Supreme Court refuses to require disclosure of the connections between them. Smelly.
“A member of the public familiar with the Maxwell trial record who reviewed the grand jury materials that the Government proposes to unseal would thus learn next to nothing new … would come away feeling disappointed and misled.”
“DOJ’s motion … itself misled victims—and the public at large—in holding out the Maxwell grand jury materials as essential to the goal of “transparency to the American public,” when in fact the grand jury materials would not add to public knowledge.”
“…DOJ, although paying lip service to Maxwell’s and Epstein’s victims, has not treated them with the solicitude they deserve.”
“(…the only arguable public interest served by disclosure would be to “expose as disingenuous the Government’s public explanations for moving to unseal”).”
“(DOJ’s “entire premise—that the Maxwell grand jury materials would bring to light meaningful new information about Epstein’s and Maxwell’s crimes, or the Government’s investigation into them—is demonstrably false.”).”
“Contrary to DOJ’s depiction, the grand jury materials would not reveal new information of any consequence.”
Here are a few excerpts from the latest court order, underlining the Trump DOJ Epstein Files mischief and trickery:
Instead of releasing the voluminous Epstein files they had, DOJ moved to disclose grand jury materials that contained nothing new.
As people evaluate the credibility of DOJ’s disclosure of the Epstein files, it’s good to remember the bogus effort so far.
🧵
Global clean energy investment continues to rise, setting new records, as Trump harms America’s strength by stooging for aging, dirty, expensive, doomed fossil fuel.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-05-06 | S.J. Res. 13 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-05-06 | H.J. Res. 61 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (55-45) |
| 2025-05-05 | H.J. Res. 61 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2025-05-01 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-05-01 | S.J. Res. 31 (119th) | Approve resolution | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Joint Resolution Passed (52-46) |
| 2025-05-01 | H.J. Res. 75 (119th) | Approve resolution | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Joint Resolution Passed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-30 | S.J. Res. 31 (119th) | Begin consideration | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-40) |
| 2025-04-30 | S.J. Res. 49 (119th) | Kill the motion | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion to Table Agreed to (49-49, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-04-30 | S.J. Res. 49 (119th) | Approve resolution | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Joint Resolution Defeated (49-49) |
| 2025-04-30 | H.J. Res. 75 (119th) | Begin consideration | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-04-30 | H.J. Res. 42 (119th) | Approve resolution | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Joint Resolution Passed (52-46) |
| 2025-04-29 | H.J. Res. 42 (119th) | Begin consideration | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Nomination Confirmed (83-14) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-13) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (60-36) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-36) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-39) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (67-29) |
| 2025-04-28 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (64-27) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-25) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-25) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-26) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-25) |
| 2025-04-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-46) |
| 2025-04-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-04-10 | H.J. Res. 20 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (53-44) |
| 2025-04-09 | H.J. Res. 20 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-42) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-37) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-42) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-37) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (66-32) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-32) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-04-07 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-39) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 305(b)(2) of the CBA re: Cortez Masto Amdt. No. 1690) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-50, 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.