I’ve heard from WA potato farmers that export markets like China and even British Columbia are essentially gone. China and India are now in the potato business, and the competition from them is growing. Meanwhile President Trump’s tariffs are putting us on the sidelines.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Washington
Maria Cantwell
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 772
Yes29%
No71%
Present0%
Not Voting0%
Party align97%
Cross-party2%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Maria Cantwell
U.S. SenatorDemocratWashington
SoupScore
Maria's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 23 sponsored · 148 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Important information for Washingtonians who are in the Middle East ⬇️
Adherence to the Constitution, transparency, reason, and deliberation, guided by American values and interests, should determine what we do next. (6/6)
He must also send his military and civilian leadership team before the people’s representatives in the House and the Senate to explain where we are and where he is taking us. (5/6)
The Congress must demand that the President seek our Constitutionally required approval if he intends to engage in a protracted conflict. (4/6)
... and rebuilding the international coalition of allies and partners forged to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon by having a vigorous inspection regime like the one under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). (3/6)
The Iranian government is by every definition an enemy of the United States, but the enduring solution is to leverage strong bipartisan support for tougher sanctions ... (2/6)
The President should not have initiated a large-scale attack on Iran without Congressional approval, the support of key allies around the world, or having made his case to the American people. (1/6)
The Congress must demand that the President seek our Constitutionally required approval if he intends to engage in a protracted conflict. (4/6)
... and rebuilding the international coalition of allies and partners forged to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon by having a vigorous inspection regime like the one under the 2015 the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). (3/6)
The Iranian government is by every definition an enemy of the United States, but the enduring solution is to leverage strong bipartisan support for tougher sanctions ... (2/6)
President Trump has no authority to make an end run around the Constitution. (2/2)
President Trump can’t seize control of or interfere in our elections. The Constitution is absolutely clear: states administer our elections, which is why the courts blocked Trump’s earlier executive order banning mail-in voting and demanding citizens’ data. (1/2)
Reposted bySen. Maria Cantwell
Watch @cantwell.senate.gov cut to the chase on ROTOR Act & tell Speaker Johnson to bring it back to the floor. www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmzp...
Plus, he’s pushing Congress to pass the SAVE America Act which will also cost Americans: time, money, and even their constitutional right to vote. (3/3)
He also made more baseless claims about our voting system. The President is threatening to nationalize our elections – power he doesn’t have under our Constitution. (2/3)
Americans who were eager to hear President Trump’s plan to fight higher health care costs, higher food costs, and higher housing costs didn’t hear one. His speech left many Americans wondering how his vision of a new Gilded Age economy applies to them. (1/3)
The SAVE America Act passed by the House of Representatives and under consideration by the Senate will cost Washingtonians time, money, and maybe even their vote.
We need to fight back.
www.columbian.com/news/2026/fe...
The President made products more expensive for the American people. People are going to tell their senators, we don't like this. So it's time for my Senate colleagues to weigh in on this debate.
This Administration illegally collected hundreds of billions of dollars from American businesses. I’m requesting detailed information about how the Administration plans to reimburse the payors of those tariffs. My letter to Sec. Bessent ⬇️
![Dear Secretary Bessent:
In light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision today that President Donald Trump exceeded his authority in imposing certain tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) must prioritize prompt reimbursement to those businesses that have paid the substantial tariffs.
Given this Administration has illegally collected hundreds of billions of dollars from American businesses, that now must be refunded, I am requesting detailed information about how the Administration plans to fairly and expeditiously reimburse the payors of those tariffs.
The Administration should have been preparing for months for the potential that the Supreme Court would likely agree with the position taken by lower courts – including the Court of International Trade, district courts, and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals – that the president exceeded his legal authority under IEEPA.[1] Many American businesses, especially small and medium-sized businesses, have struggled to pay these illegal tariffs and, for some, the financial strain has placed them on the brink of bankruptcy. Thus, it is essential Treasury implement an expeditious and transparent process to remediate the financial harm that resulted from these illegal tariffs.
As I understand it, when a good enters a U.S. port of entry, merchandise is classified and tariffs are assessed using the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Importers self-classify and declare the value or quantity of their goods and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reviews the paperwork, collects any applicable tariffs, and deposits any revenue from tariffs or other penalties into the General Fund of the United States.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did%3Aplc%3Ae3ap6sjaftiof33z6xjt54aa/bafkreicr5mgcygdru4qq2xfpu7hzvarhitw4utremfqjhicm7u3ggfds3m@jpeg)
![The Monthly Treasury Statement provides only an aggregate line item for “customs duties,” but we must have more detailed information to see precisely which firms, particularly small businesses, are shouldering the frontline cash burden of these tariff taxes. Therefore, we ask that you provide data regarding the revenues from IEEPA tariffs.
Specifically, please provide the following breakdown of the customs duties collected for the year 2024 and 2025:
Revenues collected on imports by country of origin.
Revenues collected for each Section of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule.
Revenues collected by the geographic location or state of the U.S. importers liable for payment of the duties.
The name and specific amount of revenue collected from each of the top 500 U.S. importers responsible for the highest level of duty payments
Further, Congress must also have detailed information in order to enable proper oversight and inform possible legislative action with respect to the fiscal fallout of remediating these illegal tariffs.
As you know, many companies now are pursuing refund claims through litigation.[2] Refunds, however, must not be limited to those businesses that chose to litigate or can afford to initiate litigation to seek the relief they are entitled to in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling. All businesses must have substantial clarity that the Administration will move forward with a timely, transparent, and equitable process for refunding money to which the government is not legally entitled.
Therefore, I request a detailed explanation of the Department of Treasury’s plans to process tariff refunds and the anticipated timeline for implementation. If there are no such plans in place, I urge the Department of Treasury to begin planning immediately for a tariff refund process that takes into account the following key considerations:
Procedures that are transparent;
Applicability to all affected parties, regardless of the status or disposition in the liquidation pr…](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did%3Aplc%3Ae3ap6sjaftiof33z6xjt54aa/bafkreiaws4722w5vwb3tkrsk5yqg2nu65lbk65d653f3i3ntpxrxmb5siq@jpeg)
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 | NO | 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 | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | S. 1071 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | YES | ✕ | Motion Agreed to (77-20) |
| 2025-12-15 | S. 1071 (119th) | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-20, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-12-11 | S. 1071 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | 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.