Families shouldn’t have to wonder how they’ll feed their kids because this administration would rather play politics than fully fund SNAP. Courts made clear the tools are there. They’re just choosing not to use them.
Hunger is not a bargaining chip. They should fully fund SNAP.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Virginia
Mark R. Warner
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 788
Yes35%
No61%
Present0%
Not Voting5%
Party align90%
Cross-party10%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Mark R. Warner
U.S. SenatorDemocratVirginia
SoupScore
Mark R.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 38 sponsored · 169 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Reposted bySenator Mark Warner
On Friday night, Donald Trump held a Great Gatsby-inspired Halloween party themed "A little party never killed nobody.”
On Monday morning, the Trump administration told a judge it will only PARTIALLY fund SNAP and 40 million Americans should expect delays for food benefits.
When talking about Democrats, Trump said, “If they don’t vote, it’s their problem.”
If Trump doesn’t sit down with Democrats and negotiate to reopen the government, he will be the problem for millions of Americans losing their food aid and paying double for health care.
If you haven’t already voted, get to the polls tomorrow and vote!
HAPPY HALLOWEEN! Today I’m thinking about all Virginians who will be spooked when they enter the open enrollment portal and find frighteningly high health care premiums. It’s time for Republicans to extend health care tax credits and open the government.
This is your reminder that millions of Americans will lose food benefits this weekend because Trump is refusing to tap his emergency fund.
Kids will go to school hungry because of this cruelty.
Finally, some progress on affordability… I helped lead an effort to peel back some of Trump’s tariffs, and it passed the Senate.
Good to see SOME Republicans find a spine to stand up to Trump… now let’s see if the House has the same strength.
UNBELIEVABLE. These boat strikes in the Caribbean are driving us closer to war… and this administration thinks it’s fine to hide details from Democrats and divulge more to their handpicked Republicans??
Is the safety of our troops a joke to them?
National security and the safety of our troops are on the line… and Republicans think this is something they can just keep secret from Democrats.
Shutting Democrats out of a national security briefing and withholding the legal justification of the Venezuelan boat strikes from half the Senate is indefensible. This White House is eroding our national security.
We have some actual bipartisan progress on ending Trump’s tariffs and lowering your costs.
Watch my video where I break down how much these tariffs will cost you and what I’m doing to meaningfully address your skyrocketing prices:
youtu.be/q0AZgmo5RlA?...
Republicans would rather skip work and hide than prevent premiums from skyrocketing for millions of Americans.
Democrats have a plan to prevent your costs from spiking – Republicans voted against it SEVEN TIMES.
Donald Trump won’t even face Democrats.
Donald Trump won’t even face Democrats.
Donald Trump won’t even face Democrats.
Donald Trump won’t even face Democrats.
Donald Trump won’t even face Democrats.
Donald Trump won’t even face Democrats.
I don’t understand why there’s not wall-to-wall coverage of the fact that House Republicans are on a 5-WEEK TAXPAYER-FUNDED VACATION… while working families wonder if they’ll lose SNAP benefits.
The government is shut down. Folks are worried about their food stamps, paychecks, and benefits.
And where is Donald Trump? Completely MIA. Fled the country.
Reports coming out this week are showing that AI has already pushed thousands of Americans out of the workforce. That number is only going to grow. Congress and tech companies must work together to prevent wide-scale job loss and a mass economic disruption.
The horrific situation in Sudan continues to concern me, and we cannot afford to overlook the atrocities happening in al-Fashir. It is imperative we press for more focus on the region and an end to this conflict.
The Trump administration could fund SNAP if it wanted to.
But after squeezing budgets with the highest grocery inflation in years, Trump is making things even harder by cutting off the aid families rely on.
House Republicans are currently enjoying something most Americans will never get in their entire careers – more than a month of paid vacation.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History788 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
788 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-19 | S.J. Res. 185 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 185 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-05-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-05-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-38) |
| 2026-05-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-38) |
| 2026-05-18 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (46-43) |
| 2026-05-14 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 141 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-50) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 132 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-52) |
| 2026-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2026-05-13 | S. Res. 526 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (99-0, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 163 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 163 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (49-50) |
| 2026-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2026-05-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-05-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-44) |
| 2026-05-11 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (46-45) |
| 2026-04-30 | S.J. Res. 184 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-30 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 99 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 139 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2026-04-28 | S.J. Res. 124 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 124 | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Point of Order Well Taken (51-47) |
| 2026-04-28 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2026-04-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-37) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Accept House changes | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Amendment Rejected (49-49) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Amendment Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Amendment Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Amendment Rejected (25-73) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794) | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414) | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 4956) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hirono Amdt. No. 4884) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Amendment Agreed to (98-0) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799) | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S.J. Res. 114 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114 | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Motion to Discharge Rejected (46-51) |
| 2026-04-21 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Begin consideration | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2026-04-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (47-46) |
| 2026-04-16 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-48) |
| 2026-04-16 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 138 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138 | NO | YES | ✕↔ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (36-63) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 32 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (40-59) |
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.
Page 1 / 16Next →