*17* House Republicans just joined Democrats to revive and extend ACA tax breaks, because they know families can't afford the massive price hikes they face today.
It's time for Leader Thune to bring this bill to the floor and give Republican Senators the same chance to do what's right.
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.
By now you've probably seen the tragic video of an ICE agent shooting a Minnesota woman as she tried to drive away.
The agent responsible for this tragedy must be brought to justice, and it's time for Secretary Noem to resign.
The Constitution explicitly gives Congress the power to declare war for a reason, that's why I voted 'yes' on today's war powers resolution.
It's time my colleagues started taking this president at his word and acting before he recklessly drags us into war.
As we continue to reflect on 5 years since the January 6th riot, we are reminded that while there are those that continue to try and tear down our Republic, we have the power to choose progress and defend our democracy.
This isn't true. Watch the video.
This officer was clearly unprepared to be in this situation and shouldn't have been there in the first place.
This administration needs to take accountability.
This isn't true. Watch the video.
This officer was clearly unprepared to be in this situation and shouldn't have been there in the first place.
This administration needs to take accountability.
This is tragic. My prayers are with the victim, her family, and the Minneapolis community.
The agents deployed by this administration are untrained for these situations, ultimately doing more harm than good and making our communities less safe.
They must de-escalate before more people get hurt.
hm, what about "a little something" called the 22nd amendment?
Over the last 5 years, a lot has been said about the events of January 6th, 2021.
It's been distorted, romanticized, even downplayed.
Tonight, I went to the floor to tell my story and remind us all that redemption is what makes America, America.
As we mark 5 years since rioters stormed the Capitol on January 6th, those of us who were trapped in the House Gallery delivered hot meals to thank the brave, dedicated men and women who protect and support us.
Proud to serve those who serve us every day.
Heartbroken to learn that a powerful advocate for improving Black maternal health, herself, passed away during childbirth.
Harrowing stories like hers remind us of the urgent work we have to do to address the maternal mortality crisis we currently face.
For months now, the Trump administration has conducted military operations in Venezuela with no warning, no legal authority, and no explanation provided to Congress.
Now, we know why.
![OFFICIAL STATEMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATION'S ACTIONS IN VENEZUELA
For months now, the Trump administration has conducted military operations in Venezuela with no warning, no legal authority, and no explanation provided to Congress.
Now, we know why.
The President has unilaterally carried out military activity in the Caribbean and circumvented Congressional approval, as required by the Constitution, because he knew that Congress would not support a senseless and short-sighted regime change ‘mission.’ They went so far as to lie to Congress during our recent briefings, saying specifically that their priority was not forceful regime change.
The U.S. military is not the president’s personal army.
Continued [rightward facing arrow]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did%3Aplc%3A5pgzf6g5p56phoxm4rk7tzjl/bafkreibtcmevw4ezws2jazepb45py5hfz5xm4qaeu6efcpxdfodyequa6q@jpeg)
Too many families are being priced out of the communities they call home.
We need a New Way Home, so everyone has access to a safe, affordable roof over their heads regardless of their ZIP code.
My official statement on today's shooting.
I am actively monitoring the shooting that took place at the DMV in New Castle.
The governor has confirmed that there is no active threat to the public at this time.
I'm appreciative of the courageous effort from law enforcement and praying for those involved.
Reposted bySenator Lisa Blunt Rochester
Access doesn’t matter if people can’t afford it. With ACP gone and costs rising, millions are being priced out of broadband. Affordability isn’t a side issue—it’s the foundation of closing the digital divide.
@bluntrochester.senate.gov
Let Me Be Blunt: Some folks in Washington refuse to take our housing crisis seriously.
But I know housing is a priority for Delawareans, and I’ll keep fighting to make sure everyone has a safe, affordable place to call home.
🚨UPDATE: The discharge petition to force a vote on a 3-year extension of key ACA tax credits has earned enough signatures in the House.
We’re still in session here in the Senate— it’s time for Speaker Johnson to put this to a vote. The American people can’t afford to wait.
Costs: up
Unemployment: up
Consumer confidence: down
This administration: a disaster
This weekend, communities at home & around the world have been tragically impacted by senseless gun violence.
As we mark the anniversary of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook, let us honor the memory of those 26 lives lost with action.
Action to end gun violence & make all our communities safer.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-30 | S.J. Res. 184 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-30 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 99 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 139 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2026-04-28 | S.J. Res. 124 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 124 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Well Taken (51-47) |
| 2026-04-28 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2026-04-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-37) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-49) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (25-73) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 4956) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hirono Amdt. No. 4884) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (98-0) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S.J. Res. 114 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (46-51) |
| 2026-04-21 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2026-04-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (47-46) |
| 2026-04-16 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-48) |
| 2026-04-16 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 140 | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 138 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (36-63) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 32 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (40-59) |
| 2026-04-15 | S.J. Res. 123 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 123 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2026-04-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2026-04-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2026-03-26 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-26 | S. 1383 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-25 | S.J. Res. 103 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-03-25 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-25 | S.J. Res. 107 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-24 | S.J. Res. 116 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 116 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-24 | S. 1383 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | S. 1383 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-47) |
| 2026-03-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
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.
Page 1 / 16Next →