Richard Blumenthal headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Connecticut
Born
February 13, 1946
Age 80
Phone
(202) 224-2823
Office
503 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Connecticut

Richard Blumenthal

Richard Blumenthal is an American politician and attorney serving as the senior United States senator from the state of Connecticut. A member of the Democratic Party, he has been a member of the Senate since 2011. Blumenthal previously served as U.S. attorney for the District of Connecticut, as a member of the Connecticut General Assembly, and as the 23rd Connecticut attorney general.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 783
Yes27%
No72%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align98%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Richard Blumenthal headshot
Richard Blumenthal
U.S. SenatorDemocratConnecticut
SoupScore
Richard's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 103 sponsored · 568 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

While religious discrimination must be forbidden & fought, this internal VA memo lacks any factual basis or rationale. It raises the specter of dividing the veteran community & favoring some religions over others. federalnewsnetwork.com/workforce/20...
Sharing classified military information with your wife, brother, & personal lawyer on a commercial app flies in the face of our entire intelligence community. Sec. Hegseth must take personal accountability for his reckless disregard for the safety of our servicemembers.
Pope Francis inspired the world—people of all faiths—with his incomparable courage, conviction & compassion. In an increasingly troubled time, bedeviled by conflict & despair, he led by example—powerfully preaching peace & demonstrating deep caring & hope.
These revocations are having a horrific, chilling ripple effect on the students & staff who enrich & elevate our colleges & universities. We will not stand idly by as Trump attacks America’s higher education—threatening our core academic freedom & values.
Proud to be in New Haven & Storrs—centers of educational excellence—to stand in defense of international students & faculty who have seen their valid visas revoked with arbitrary, craven cruelty.
They will now have to give up clients, causes, hires, reputation, not to mention hundreds of millions in fees—without recourse or safeguards, or anything reliable in return. Hope is not a strategy. Neither is appeasement.
Some of the supposedly savviest, shrewdest lawyers on the planet have backed themselves into one of the worst deals in history. They’ve shredded their honor & integrity only to become indentured to Trump’s tyrannical whims.
Law firms that caved to Trump’s bullying are now at greater risk of ruin than before because they thought they could appease him with a handshake deal (no documents) an open-ended pro bono commitment (no specifics), & expansive public assurances (no factual evidence).
I’ll be standing with Rep. Delauro & Rep. Larson today to lay out our fight to preserve Social Security against benefit cuts, access constraints, & unconstitutional privacy violations. Trump’s slash & trash must be stopped. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/202...
The mob had code language for bribes—fishes, numbers—but Trump’s favors are undisguised. Other industries are no doubt racing to Trump’s door to ask how they can “earn” tariff exemptions. Nobody needs AI to read the roadmap—bend the knee, beckon the wallet, be obeisant.
Trump is making these law firms complicit in his assault on the rule of law. I’m redoubling investigative efforts through PSI & support for firms that put professional integrity above profit & self serving obeisance to a bullying tyrant.
These sellout surrenders are staggering— & sickening. Trump has bludgeoned some of the most powerful, wealthy law firms into $600 million worth of free work, but equally important, it will disqualify them from causes or clients he dislikes apnews.com/article/trum...
Trump has prioritized his billionaire buddies over the needs of the American people. We continue to stand up to Trump's slashing of vital agencies & programs, including veterans' health care, food assistance for families, & Medicaid-all to provide a tax cut for the ultra-wealthy.
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
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-21Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 233)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (24-76)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-21Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 776)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (51-49)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 925)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 130)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Klobuchar Amdt. No. 494)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 454)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-49)
2025-02-20End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-02-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-02-18S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47)
2025-02-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-02-18Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (48-45)
2025-02-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-43)
2025-02-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-02-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (72-28)
2025-02-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2025-02-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (55-44)
2025-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-45)

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.

← PrevPage 15 / 16Next →