None of these tariffs help the average American. Full stop.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Maryland
Angela D. Alsobrooks
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 775
Yes29%
No70%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align96%
Cross-party2%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Angela D. Alsobrooks
U.S. SenatorDemocratMaryland
SoupScore
Angela D.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 29 sponsored · 220 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Who is Trump’s “Liberation Day” really for?
It’s not for middle class families in Maryland who are going to pay more for groceries, cars, gas, clothes, and more.
Trump has not done a single thing to bring down prices for families.
Strom Thurmond set a record when he filibustered the Civil Rights Act in 1957.
Senator Cory Booker just broke that record. And he did it fighting for every single American.
I would dare say, in so many ways, he is our ancestors' wildest dream.
I am so proud of my friend - holding the Floor still - 21 hours and counting.
Courage and leadership is just what our country needs right now - and Senator Booker is delivering.
I'm heading back to the Floor to support him as he keeps shattering records.
If tariffs will only cause “short term pain” like Republicans say, then they should prove it and join me in passing my Tariff Transparency Act.
The American people deserve to know the truth about Trump's tariffs.
I was so glad to sit down with Maryland Girl Scout Troop #33012.
I told these aspiring leaders that this Senate belongs to them - their issues and concerns are mine too. And I am honored to represent them.
Reposted bySenator Angela Alsobrooks
The Trump-Vance administration continue to plunge us into chaos. Trump’s trade war on our allies will only increase costs and fears for American families.
Your president doesn’t care about raising your prices.
But I do.
It’s why I introduced the Tariff Transparency Act so Americans can know how these tariffs will impact them.
The American people deserve to know the truth about these tariffs.
What a great morning celebrating Women’s History Month in Montgomery County!
Thank you Councilmember Laurie-Anne Sayles for bringing together all these amazing women.
The years to come look brighter with what the women in this room are leaving for future generations.
And this is exactly why I asked Trump's Labor Secretary and Deputy Sec. Nominees if they'd uphold collective bargaining.
Unions built the middle class. They were here before this President. And they will be here long after.
I will support all efforts against this brazenly illegal attack on unions.
Trump’s threat to move federal agencies out of Maryland – upending the lives of countless more civil servants – is just another step in his ongoing witch hunt.
If Republicans take government efficiency seriously, they'll join us in passing the COST Relocation Act.
If DOGE were serious about rooting out unqualified workers, they’d focus on their own cabinet nominees - maybe like a Sec. of Defense leaking classified war plans?
My MERIT Act would reinstate recently terminated probationary federal employees and provide them back pay.
This is so dangerous and deadly.
I warned America that confirming RFK Jr. would be a mistake.
This move will cost lives – and all at the hands of an agency soon filled with conspiracy theorists instead of doctors.
If the President is unable to bring himself to fire them, then they must both resign immediately.
The President has a duty to take seriously the safety and lives of every American military member.
He must remove Pete Hegseth from his position as Secretary of Defense and Mike Waltz from his position as National Security Adviser.
Their security clearances must be permanently revoked.
Had the messages fallen into the wrong hands — a probable scenario given the lack of security and Waltz’s reckless inclusion of a political reporter — the mission would have failed, and there is a more than likely chance those pilots would be dead.
It is by the grace of God that these pilots are alive today.
It is abundantly clear that the Secretary of Defense and the National Security Adviser put the lives of American pilots in grave danger. In doing so, they have failed in their mandate to protect the lives of our American military members and our national security interests. 🧵
By cutting Maryland's crown jewel - the NIH - Musk and Trump are callously ripping away treatments and cures from Americans suffering from Alzheimer’s disease, cancer, ALS, and other devastating diseases.
They must reverse course now. Lives depend on it.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History775 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
775 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 776) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 925) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 130) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Klobuchar Amdt. No. 494) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 454) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-49) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-02-18 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-02-18 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-02-18 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (72-28) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2025-02-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2025-02-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (55-44) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-45) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-46) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (77-23) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-38) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-35) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (80-17) |
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.