Catherine Cortez Masto headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Nevada
Born
March 29, 1964
Age 62
Phone
(202) 224-3542
Office
309 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Nevada

Catherine Cortez Masto

Voting Record — 885
Yes36%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align92%
Cross-party8%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Catherine Cortez Masto headshot
Catherine Cortez Masto
U.S. SenatorDemocratNevada
SoupScore
Catherine's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 118 sponsored · 268 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Even members of Trump’s own party are appalled by the blatantly corrupt “weaponization” fund, but the President is doubling down. It’s never been more apparent that Donald Trump’s #1 priority is enriching himself and his allies.
DACA recipients grew up in the United States. They’ve gone to school here, started families and careers here, and give back every day to this country.   Passing the Dream Act is essential to providing them the peace of mind and stability they deserve.
Workers in Nevada and everywhere that counts on tourism are losing out on tips, having their hours cut, or even losing their jobs completely because of the impact of high gas prices on travelers. The President caused this with his reckless war of choice, but he doesn’t care.
In case you missed it, the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area is about to grow by 9,000 acres thanks to legislation I just got signed into law! My bill will ensure that we protect even more of this critical desert ecosystem alongside critical improvements to our water infrastructure.
Trump’s “weaponization” fund is so corrupt, Republican leaders postponed their planned votes today to avoid having to answer for it. It’s time for all of us, including Republicans in Congress, to stand up against the historic corruption of this Administration. @donlemonofficial.bsky.social
Our voice is our power. That’s why Donald Trump and Republican leaders are trying so hard to suppress Americans’ votes in the upcoming elections. But we can fight, and we can win, by keeping up our efforts and standing up for our rights and freedoms in this country.
Let’s be clear about why the Trump Admin. wrote this rule, because it’s not about security: they want to go after individuals who are following the rules, people with DACA and TPS and other immigrants who are just trying to live their lives and build a future for their families.
President Trump signs an executive order that requires banks to take a closer look at the citizenship of their customers, a new measure in his administration’s push to clamp down on people living in the country illegally.
“Trump said DACA recipients would be safe. That’s not true.” That’s what Stephanie told me when her husband, a DACA recipient, was detained despite his protected status and separated from his family. Stories like this are happening across the country, and they need to be told.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
885 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
2025-09-30H.R. 5371 (119th)Final passageYESNOBill Defeated (55-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-30S. 2882 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Defeated (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-29S. 2806 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (37-61, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2025-09-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-45)
2025-09-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (47-43)
2025-09-19End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (47-45)
2025-09-19H.R. 5371 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Defeated (44-48, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-19S. 2882 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Defeated (47-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-09-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-09-17Decision of the Chair PN12-19 and PN25-28 and PN12-45 and PN22-1 and PN22-2 and PN22-5 and PN22-27 and PN22-20 and PN22-21 and PN26-8 and PN26-34 and PN26-35 and PN55-41 and PN22-4 and PN22-8 and PN22-19 and PN26-1 and PN22-23 and PN25-40 and PN26-7 and PN26-19 and PN26-31 and PN60-3 and PN26-44 and PN25-2 and PN55-16 and PN60-9 and PN60-10 and PN129-8 and PN26-45 and PN141-37 and PN141-7 and PN141-28 and PN12-22 and PN25-21 and PN22-3 and PN26-22 and PN13-5 and PN22-24 and PN25-33 and PN141-18 and PN150-5 and PN345-16 and PN55-42 and PN54-6 and PN54-7 and PN55-45 and PN55-25YESYESDecision of Chair Not Sustained (47-52)
2025-09-17Motion to Reconsider PN55-25 and PN55-45 and PN54-7 and PN54-6 and PN55-42 and PN345-16 and PN150-5 and PN141-18 and PN25-33 and PN22-24 and PN13-5 and PN26-22 and PN22-3 and PN25-21 and PN12-22 and PN141-28 and PN141-7 and PN141-37 and PN26-45 and PN129-8 and PN60-10 and PN60-9 and PN55-16 and PN25-2 and PN26-44 and PN60-3 and PN26-31 and PN26-19 and PN26-7 and PN25-40 and PN22-23 and PN26-1 and PN22-19 and PN22-8 and PN22-4 and PN55-41 and PN26-35 and PN26-34 and PN26-8 and PN22-21 and PN22-20 and PN22-27 and PN22-5 and PN22-2 and PN22-1 and PN12-45 and PN12-19 and PN25-28NONOMotion to Reconsider Agreed to (51-47)
2025-09-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-16S. Con. Res. 22 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Rejected (36-62)
2025-09-16S.J. Res. 60 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-51)
2025-09-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (48-47)
2025-09-15End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2025-09-15S. Res. 377 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOResolution Agreed to (51-44)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-43)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)Decision of the Chair S.Res. 377YESYESDecision of Chair Not Sustained (45-53)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)Motion to Reconsider S.Res. 377NONOMotion to Reconsider Agreed to (52-45)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-10S. 2296 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-49)
2025-09-09S. Res. 377 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-09-09S. Res. 377 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (53-46)
2025-09-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-09-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-09-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-46)
2025-09-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-09-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-09-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-43)
2025-09-04S. 2296 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (83-13)
2025-09-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-09-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-09-02S. 2296 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-14, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (71-23)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeYESNomination Confirmed (72-22)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-35)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-42)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeYESYESNomination Confirmed (78-17)
2025-08-02End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (76-19)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-44)
2025-08-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-08-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)

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.

← PrevPage 8 / 18Next →