Christopher A. Coons headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Delaware
Born
September 9, 1963
Age 62
Phone
(202) 224-5042
Office
218 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Delaware

Christopher A. Coons

Christopher Andrew Coons is an American lawyer and politician serving as the senior United States senator from Delaware, a seat he has held since 2010. A member of the Democratic Party, Coons served as the county executive of New Castle County from 2005 to 2010.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 783
Yes31%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting5%
Party align94%
Cross-party6%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Christopher A. Coons headshot
Christopher A. Coons
U.S. SenatorDemocratDelaware
SoupScore
Christopher A.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 51 sponsored · 354 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

If chronic disease is an existential threat to our nation, why is RFK Jr. slashing research programs that could help of millions of Americans treat and prevent these very diseases? You can't solve a crisis by destroying the tools needed to fight it. www.nytimes.com/2025/04/07/h...
Ask the 70 million Americans who rely on Social Security what they think of it, and they’ll tell you it’s vital lifeline. Ask Elon Musk what he thinks of it, and he’ll tell you it’s a Ponzi Scheme—a fraud.
Congress has a constitutional role to play in strengthening our economy and protecting our national security from President Trump’s policies. My Democratic colleagues and I continue to work to fulfill that role, and I hope that soon, enough senators on both sides of the aisle will do so.
Time and again tonight, Senate Republicans were given the opportunity to take a stand against these disastrous tariffs and in favor of protecting Social Security. Time and again they refused.
Trump’s tariff policies have unleashed a national economic crisis, and tonight we saw Senate Republicans’ solution: slashing Social Security and Medicaid to pay for more tax cuts for billionaires.
Democrats are clear: we can focus on the Trump administration’s security failures and still hold them accountable for trying to cut Medicaid to pay for tax breaks for billionaires.
The Supreme Court has unanimously held that government officials can't punish private organizations they dislike for speech they disagree with. Trump's attacks on law firms are unconstitutional, and our nations' biggest law firms shouldn't bend to a bully. www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnb...
I'm glad that the Pentagon's independent inspector general is investigating this, but it's clear this administration's use of Signal to discuss sensitive information goes far beyond @DeptofDefense. That's why I've called on multiple IG's to start similar investigations as well.
JUST IN: The acting Inspector General of the Defense Department will review Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s use of Signal in a group chat with other key national security officials to discuss military strikes against the Houthis in Yemen last month, the IG’s office announced.
Social Security isn't a giveaway—you've earned it, just like your parents and grandparents. I'll keep defending Social Security so you get the benefits you’re owed.
Choosing between protecting Social Security for older Americans or cutting it like Elon Musk and Mike Johnson want to do to pay for tax breaks for billionaires isn’t an economic choice. It’s a moral choice.
“Please cancel the contracts [even though] our improper payments will go up, and fraudsters may compromise identities…” This is damning. DOGE isn’t finding or eliminating waste and fraud at the Social Security Administration. They’re creating it. www.huffpost.com/entry/janet-...
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
2026-05-14S. Res. 690 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 130 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-53)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 141 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (50-50)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 132 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (48-52)
2026-05-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2026-05-13S. Res. 526 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (99-0, 3/5 majority required)
2026-05-13S.J. Res. 163 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 163YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (49-50)
2026-05-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2026-05-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2026-05-11End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-44)
2026-05-11S. Res. 690 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOResolution Agreed to (46-45)
2026-04-30S.J. Res. 184 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-30S. Res. 690 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 99 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 139 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2026-04-28S.J. Res. 124 (119th)Point of Order S.J.Res. 124NONOPoint of Order Well Taken (51-47)
2026-04-28S. Res. 690 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2026-04-27End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-37)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Accept House changesNONOConcurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-49)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-50)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (25-73)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794)NONOMotion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414)NONOMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 4956)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hirono Amdt. No. 4884)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (98-0)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22S.J. Res. 114 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (46-51)
2026-04-21S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2026-04-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (47-46)
2026-04-16End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-48)
2026-04-16H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (50-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-48)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 138 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138NOYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (36-63)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 32 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32NOYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (40-59)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 123 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 123YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-52)
2026-04-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2026-04-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2026-04-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2026-04-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)

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 →