Lisa Blunt Rochester headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Delaware
Born
February 10, 1962
Age 64
Phone
(202) 224-2441
Office
513 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Delaware

Lisa Blunt Rochester

Lisa LaTrelle Blunt Rochester is an American politician serving since 2025 as the junior United States senator from Delaware. From 2017 to 2025, she served as the U.S. representative for Delaware's at-large congressional district. A member of the Democratic Party, she is the first woman and first African American to represent Delaware in both chambers of Congress.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 783
Yes27%
No73%
Present0%
Not Voting0%
Party align98%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Lisa Blunt Rochester headshot
Lisa Blunt Rochester
U.S. SenatorDemocratDelaware
SoupScore
Lisa's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 33 sponsored · 183 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

There’s never been a plan. Planes are falling out of the sky and this admin wants to fire the people in charge of helping them land safely. All to justify giving their billionaire friends’ companies lucrative government contracts. They’re looking out for themselves, not you.
On the 60th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, we remember the courage of all those who remained undeterred by bigotry and violence as marched for voting rights. As those fundamental rights that their bravery secured come under threat yet again, I’ll never back down. We’re not going back.
$2,000 may mean nothing to Trump and his billionaire friends, but for families across Delaware this would be a disaster. But that's the point: they don't care about families living paycheck to paycheck so long as they keep getting richer.
So great to meet Gabriella and Arianna, two outstanding young leaders from Delaware who’ve been selected to come to Washington as part of the U.S. Senate Youth Program. Please join me to congratulate them for this outstanding recognition!
It's unbelievable that Trump and the DOGE boys think firing care providers and staff from the VA will "increase efficiency." It's another massive betrayal of the brave men and women who have served our nation. Unfortunately that's becoming par for the course for this president.
The headline 'Trump administration plans to cut 80,000 employees from Veterans Affairs, according to internal memo' from the Associated Press sits over a black and white photo of the Veterans Affairs building in Washington, D.C.
We should be doing everything we can to bring down grocery costs for families, not starting pointless trade wars to raise prices even further. As the cost-of-living crisis gets even worse, it's clear this administration isn't looking out for our communities.
Don't be fooled: every time he says ‘tariffs’, Trump is talking about alienating our allies and raising the cost of everything you buy. He doesn’t care about you, he cares about the chaos he can use as a distraction to enrich himself and his friends.
During his first term, Trump ran up the national debt giving his rich friends massive tax breaks. Now in his second term, he wants to pay for another huge tax cut by slashing your Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. This time is different, and so much worse.
Federal workers who show up every day looking for ways to improve the lives of people all across the country deserve better than the treatment they’ve received from this administration. Playing games with the lives of hard working public servants isn’t efficiency, it’s cruelty.
This is yet another installment in Trump’s long history of demeaning the brave men and women who served in our nation’s armed forces. It's insult to cruel injury for the thousands of veterans who now find themselves unemployed at the hands of this administration.
Alina Habba on veterans who have been fired from government jobs: "Perhaps they're not fit to have a job at this moment."
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
2025-12-04S. Res. 520 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (43-37, 3/5 majority required)
2025-12-04H.J. Res. 131 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (49-45)
2025-12-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (63-34)
2025-12-03S.J. Res. 91 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (49-47)
2025-12-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-41)
2025-12-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-40)
2025-12-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-39)
2025-12-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (61-36)
2025-12-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-12-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-41)
2025-11-20H.J. Res. 130 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (51-43)
2025-11-19S.J. Res. 76 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (46-51)
2025-11-19S.J. Res. 89 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47)
2025-11-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (66-32)
2025-11-18End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (65-32)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (60-40)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-40, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (60-40)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-40, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Agreed to (76-24)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (47-53)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (47-53)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (60-40)
2025-11-09H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (60-40, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-07S. 3012 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (53-43, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-06S.J. Res. 90 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 90YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (49-51)
2025-11-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-43)
2025-11-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-41)
2025-11-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-11-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-11-04H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-44, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-10-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-10-30S.J. Res. 88 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Passed (51-47)
2025-10-30S.J. Res. 80 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-45)
2025-10-29S.J. Res. 77 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Passed (50-46)
2025-10-29S.J. Res. 69 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Rejected (25-72)
2025-10-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-10-29S.J. Res. 80 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46)
2025-10-28S.J. Res. 81 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Passed (52-48)
2025-10-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-10-28Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-47)
2025-10-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-10-28H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-27Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (58-40)
2025-10-27Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-10-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-10-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (48-45)
2025-10-23S. 3012 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)

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 4 / 16Next →