Trump’s pay-to-play DOJ just corruptly caved to Ticketmaster—selling out music fans to lobbyists. This weak settlement will do nothing to stop Ticketmaster’s anticompetitive abuses against consumers & musicians.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Connecticut
Richard Blumenthal
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 772
Yes26%
No72%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align98%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Richard Blumenthal
U.S. SenatorDemocratConnecticut
SoupScore
Richard's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 102 sponsored · 558 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
I will continue to demand answers & accountability from Binance for having helped prop up Iranian-linked terrorist organizations & illicit Russian oil sales. Silence on key facts speaks volumes about Binance’s suspected complicity.
Critical questions about Binance’s firing of internal investigators & its compliance with American sanctions & banking laws remain unanswered.
Binance’s evasive response completely dodges my questions & does little to ease my concerns that sanctioned entities, terrorist organizations, & other criminal actors have been surreptitiously laundering nearly $2 billion using its cryptocurrency exchange since its 2023 consent order.
Whoever follows her must institute commonsense reforms that the American people have demanded & police forces around the country routinely follow. Changing only the top official is inadequate without changing the practices & power structure in the department.
Kristi Noem’s firing is well-earned. The atrocities she oversaw, the falsehoods she peddled, & the corruption she committed—all richly deserve her discharge. President Trump should have made it explicit, rather than disguising it with another position of public trust.
Another nation building forever war—that’s what I feared after our classified briefing & more so with every day of mounting costs in lives & resources. Now Trump’s war of whim & vanity threatens to escalate regionally & spiral out of control.
Trump shouts the quiet part out loud—he must be involved in choosing new leadership in Iran. His regime change agenda is a path toward American troops on the ground. Bombing alone can’t achieve it. Our nation’s sons & daughters will be in harm's way.
Courage still counts. Kudos to law firms showing spine & standing up to Trump’s illegal bullying. As for firms that cravenly caved, you’ll be accountable—my PSI investigation into these malign deals will continue.
My foremost concern is the safety & wellbeing of the men & women in our armed forces & their families who are in harm’s way. 4
This attack fits a pattern of unilateral action without accountability to the American people. I believe that Congress should come back into session, demand answers on behalf of Americans, & act on the Iran War Powers Resolution. 3/
A nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable & Iran’s malign activities throughout the region pose a severe danger, but President Trump has failed to explain to the American people his objectives, end game, or exit strategy—risking another forever war. 2/
War must always be a last resort & never a first choice. The Trump Administration seems to be engaging in a war of choice that rejects opportunities for diplomacy. 1/
A veteran’s disability rating must be strictly based on that veteran’s underlying condition, & I will be introducing legislation to ensure any Administration can never try to cut veterans’ benefits in this way again.
This policy would have put veterans in an impossible situation of choosing between taking the life-improving medication they need or risk losing their earned benefits.
The Secretary has started the process to permanently rescind a cruel & dangerous policy that never should have been considered—slashing disability benefits for thousands of veterans. His overdue action is a credit to the tens of thousands of veterans who made their voices heard.
For decades, I worked with dedicated FBI professionals like the agents just fired—a reckless, reprehensible act of retribution by a totally unqualified, irresponsible Director. No doubt he relishes the distraction from his own disastrous missteps.
As Chief Justice, Roberts has a responsibility to denounce Trump’s rabid, rancid attack on Supreme Court colleagues, just as he’s done against other threats. He could lead the entire Court in a well-framed defense.
If Trump wants to make good on this promise he’ll support my bipartisan GRID Act.
Reposted byRichard Blumenthal
Popok is joined by Senator Richard Blumenthal, the Senior Senator from Connecticut, about staggering revelations at yesterday's spotlight hearing in which a former ICE lawyer and trainer shockingly revealed that he was instructed to train ICE to intentionally violate the law.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History772 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
772 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-20 | 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 | NO | 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 | YES | 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 | YES | 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) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (78-20) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-42) |
| 2025-01-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-42) |
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.