Working around the clock? House Republicans haven't been here in weeks.
If Republicans were the ones concerned about health care, they'd be negotiating to avert the health care crisis THEY created.
It's time for the GOP to come back to Washington and do their job.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Delaware
Lisa Blunt Rochester
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 772
Yes27%
No73%
Present0%
Not Voting0%
Party align98%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Lisa Blunt Rochester
U.S. SenatorDemocratDelaware
SoupScore
Lisa's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 30 sponsored · 177 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
We should be doing everything in our power to protect our friends and neighbors from the oncoming health care crisis.
Instead, Republicans refused to negotiate and shut down the government.
My message? Get back to Washington and do your job.
Republicans know this is a lie, but they repeat it anyway.
It's because they can't defend kicking millions off of their insurance and raising costs for everyone.
Reposted bySenator Lisa Blunt Rochester
After shutting down the government, House Republicans went on vacation all this week.
Now they're on vacation ALL NEXT WEEK, TOO. It's absurd.
No one should pretend Republicans care about reopening government or saving your health care.
Republicans shut down the government, left town, and refuse to come back.
All to protect their billionaire tax cuts and keep millions of Americans uninsured.
Republicans need to come back to work and reopen the government.
Reposted bySenator Lisa Blunt Rochester
Wanna know whose shutdown this is?
Pay attention to who’s enjoying it.
Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House.
They could end this shutdown if they wanted to.
Instead, they keep trying to pass a bill that pushes us closer to a health care catastrophe.
Reposted bySenator Lisa Blunt Rochester
15 million people kicked off their health care.
Health insurance costs for families will massively increase.
Republicans shut down the government to make YOUR health care more expensive.
Reposted bySenator Lisa Blunt Rochester
We're not asking for the moon here. We’re trying to help Americans pay for their health insurance.
Translation: House Republicans are RULING OUT reopening the government.
The American people can't afford your inaction, Mr. Speaker.
People aren't reading polls, they're reading their bills and they know costs are skyrocketing thanks to this administration.
That's why I'm here— to fight for Delawareans and folks all across the country who feel left behind.
This is yet another attempt to mislead you— rates aren't set in December, they're going out NOW.
While Republicans pretend like it's no big deal, millions of our friends and neighbors are about to be priced out of their coverage.
This just shows the warped perspective this administration has on government.
There aren't 'Democrat Agencies' or 'Republican Agencies'.
Federal Agencies exist to help EVERY American, regardless of party. Shutting them down hurts all of us.
We're not saying we have a perfect health care system, but we can't break it even further and let people's costs skyrocket.
People are already hurting, and every day Republicans refuse to come to the table makes things worse.
We're entering the second day of the Republican government shutdown, and they STILL haven't come to the table to negotiate.
The government is shuttered and we're on the brink of a health care catastrophe. What are they waiting for?
This is a blatant attempt by the Trump administration to go after opponents by illegally withholding funds, killing jobs, and raising energy costs for red and blue states alike.
If they think this is a winning strategy, they're dead wrong.
I won't be swayed by corrupt abuses of power.
Let Me Be Blunt: Republicans just shut down the government.
Reposted bySenator Lisa Blunt Rochester
I was sent this by a Georgian this morning. 2025 premiums vs 2026 premiums for someone making $65k a year.
Republicans in Washington did this.
This is what I'm fighting to stop. This is what’s at stake in this shutdown fight.
If Republicans were serious, they'd be listening to the people who are saying: 'please don't take away our care'.
If Republicans were serious, they wouldn't stand by while health insurance premiums double.
It's time for Republicans to get serious.
This morning, the federal government shut down because Republicans refused to negotiate.
Premiums are set to double. 15 million Americans are losing their health insurance. All to protect their billionaire tax breaks.
It's time for Republicans to come to the table.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-01-29 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-55, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-27 | S. 3627 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (82-15) |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (85-14, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-14 | S.J. Res. 98 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 98 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Well Taken (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2026-01-13 | S.J. Res. 84 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-01-12 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (80-13, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-40) |
| 2026-01-08 | S.J. Res. 98 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 98 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2026-01-07 | S.J. Res. 86 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (43-50) |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2026-01-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (50-35) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-42) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-35) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (58-36) |
| 2025-12-18 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-12-18 | S.J. Res. 82 (119th) | Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 82 | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (50-50) |
| 2025-12-17 | S. Res. 412 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (71-29) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (69-27) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | S. 1071 (119th) | Accept House changes | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Agreed to (77-20) |
| 2025-12-15 | S. 1071 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-20, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 1071 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (75-22) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | Resolution S.Res. 532 | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 3385 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 3386 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-10 | S. Res. 532 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-12-10 | S.J. Res. 82 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-49) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-12-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-12-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-32) |
| 2025-12-04 | S. Res. 520 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (43-37, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-04 | H.J. Res. 131 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 131 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-45) |
| 2025-12-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (63-34) |
| 2025-12-03 | S.J. Res. 91 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (49-47) |
| 2025-12-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-41) |
| 2025-12-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-40) |
| 2025-12-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-39) |
| 2025-12-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (61-36) |
| 2025-12-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-12-01 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-41) |
| 2025-11-20 | H.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 130 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-43) |
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.