Michael F. Bennet headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Colorado
Born
November 28, 1964
Age 61
Phone
(202) 224-5852
Office
261 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Colorado

Michael F. Bennet

Michael Farrand Bennet is an American attorney, businessman, and politician serving as the senior United States senator from Colorado, a seat he has held since 2009. A member of the Democratic Party, he was appointed to the seat when Senator Ken Salazar became Secretary of the Interior. Bennet previously worked as a managing director for the Anschutz Investment Company, chief of staff to Denver mayor John Hickenlooper, and superintendent of Denver Public Schools. Bennet is running for Governor of Colorado in 2026.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 783
Yes29%
No69%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align96%
Cross-party3%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Michael F. Bennet headshot
Michael F. Bennet
U.S. SenatorDemocratColorado
SoupScore
Michael F.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 60 sponsored · 219 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Dave, a father of five in Littleton, is facing a $1,500/month increase to his family’s health insurance plan. He shared that their budget cannot handle this dramatic increase in coverage costs without radical changes to their family’s daily life. (1/2)
President Trump’s open defiance of court orders and refusal to release funding for Americans who rely on SNAP benefits to feed their families is nothing short of cruel. President Trump has the power and the legal tools to fully fund SNAP. Anything less is unacceptable.
I stand in solidarity with the performers at Casa Bonita as they organize and engage in mediation for fair wages, safe working conditions, and respect in the workplace. Every Coloradan deserves the dignity that comes with a fair and just workplace.
The Trump Administration must stop using hunger as a political weapon, follow the law, and fully fund SNAP. The administration has the authority and resources to fund food assistance for hungry families, and these half measures are unacceptable.
Colorado has led the country in protecting patients’ credit scores from the burden of unexpected medical debt. The Trump Administration’s cruel attempts to upend these protections, as they leave working families without affordable coverage, will worsen the health care crisis Coloradans are facing.
If you have seen your 2026 health care premiums skyrocket, please share your story. Republicans have refused to extend critical premium tax credits for working families, and now thousands of Coloradans are at risk of losing coverage. Your story will allow me to shine a light on this crisis.
For weeks, I’ve been demanding the Trump administration use contingency funding for critical SNAP benefits that keep families fed. Now, the courts are requiring it. To Donald Trump and Republicans: get back to work and stop messing with Americans’ lives.
Countless Coloradans are now facing similar choices because of Republicans' failure to extend critical premium tax credits. I will keep fighting in Washington to find a solution and protect Coloradans' health care. (2/2)
After a breast cancer diagnosis in 2024, Cyndi relied on her Connect for Health plan for the life-saving treatments and therapies she needed. Now she's in remission & facing the impossible choice of skipping her annual appointments or paying $1200 more/ month for coverage she can't afford. (1/2)
Bob's story is the reality for countless Coloradans. Working families in our state simply cannot afford to pay thousands more every month for health insurance. I will keep fighting to ensure more Coloradans don’t lose their coverage as a result of this crisis.
The Trump Administration spent $20 billion in taxpayer dollars to prop up Argentina and paved the way for their beef producers to profit at the expense of our own. I will continue to demand answers from Trump’s appointees for this ridiculous policy and betrayal of Colorado’s ranchers.
Yesterday, the Durango community came together to peacefully protest the cruel actions of an ICE raid that separated a family. I am outraged to see that in response, ICE confronted the protestors with pepper spray, rubber bullets, and physical force. (1/2)
Instead of ending his trade war and bringing down costs to help struggling ranchers, President Trump is prioritizing his friendship with Argentina’s president & his country’s beef producers over our own. Colorado ranchers and their families deserve stability, not politically driven trade policies.
Higher premiums will force working families across the state to choose between health care and other necessities like groceries or rent. And yet, Republicans refuse to extend this critical lifeline. (2/2)
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
783 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
2026-05-14S. Res. 690 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 130 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-53)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 141 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (50-50)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 132 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (48-52)
2026-05-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2026-05-13S. Res. 526 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (99-0, 3/5 majority required)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 163 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 163YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (49-50)
2026-05-12End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2026-05-12Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2026-05-11End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-44)
2026-05-11S. Res. 690 (119th)Approve resolutionNOT_VOTINGNOResolution Agreed to (46-45)
2026-04-30S.J. Res. 184 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-30S. Res. 690 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 99 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 139 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2026-04-28S.J. Res. 124 (119th)Point of Order S.J.Res. 124NONOPoint of Order Well Taken (51-47)
2026-04-28S. Res. 690 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2026-04-27End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-37)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Accept House changesNONOConcurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-49)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-50)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (25-73)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794)NONOMotion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414)NONOMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 4956)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hirono Amdt. No. 4884)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (98-0)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22S.J. Res. 114 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (46-51)
2026-04-21S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2026-04-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (47-46)
2026-04-16End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-48)
2026-04-16H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (50-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-48)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 138 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (36-63)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 32 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (40-59)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 123 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 123YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-52)
2026-04-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2026-04-14End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2026-04-14Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2026-04-13End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)

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 →