The clock is ticking for Republicans to work with us to protect Americans and law-abiding immigrants from the Trump Admin.’s abuses.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Nevada
Catherine Cortez Masto
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 782
Yes34%
No63%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align91%
Cross-party9%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Catherine Cortez Masto
U.S. SenatorDemocratNevada
SoupScore
Catherine's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 101 sponsored · 240 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Americans are demanding protections for our Constitutional rights, independent investigations and accountability, and commonsense public safety standards for federal law enforcement.
If the House GOP hadn't killed it at the last minute, the bipartisan ROAD to Housing Act could have been law in December and begun lowering housing costs for Nevadans.
Instead, the plan we're getting from the leader of the Republican party is: "I want to drive housing prices up"
Senate Democrats won the fight to kill the bill that would have funded DHS for the full year with no protections for Americans and law-abiding immigrants.
Now, I'm fighting for the commonsense standards, accountability, and constitutional protections Nevadans are demanding.
Black Nevadans have been a core part of our state's history since the very beginning, from the ranches in the Carson Valley to Las Vegas' Historic Westside.
I'm proud to celebrate Nevada's vibrant Black community this month and the contributions they make every day to make our state stronger.
These fraudsters target people of all ages, but they often go after seniors to take advantage of their hard-earned retirement and Social Security benefits.
Especially as we approach Valentine's Day, take a moment to ensure you and your loved ones know the signs of these scams. (4/4)
In fact, one of the fastest growing scams involves the scammer pretending to be a cryptocurrency investor and asking their target to join them.
Remember: if someone you met online starts asking for money before you've even met in person, it's likely to be a scam. (3/4)
Romance scammers often develop the relationship quickly, push to move conversations off of trusted platforms, and refuse to meet in person.
Then, they start asking for money. Sometimes that's gift cards or wire transfers, but these days they often involve cryptocurrency. (2/4)
As Nevada's Attorney General, I went after scammers targeting Nevada seniors. Over the years, their tactics have changed - and today one of the most common strategies is the "romance scam."
All of us should know the signs to protect our loved ones from fraud. (1/4)
consumer.ftc.gov/articles/wha...
Potentially thousands of jobs every month - that's just one of the costs that Trump's blanket tariffs imposed on Americans last year.
So much for the "Golden Age" he promised.
The agreement we secured today also keeps essential agencies like TSA and FEMA operating so we can focus on the reforms that Nevadans are demanding.
Public safety is a responsibility, and we need to be working together to deliver for America. (3/3)
That's good news, but we still have work to do.
Republicans must now meet our demands for Constitutional protections, real accountability, and public safety standards. And if they don't work with us in the next two weeks, I will not support the DHS funding bill. (2/3)
Here's what's going on in the Senate:
Yesterday, Senate Democrats killed a bill that would have fully funded DHS with no guardrails or reforms.
We did this to protect Americans and law-abiding immigrants from the horrific abuses the Trump Admin. has enabled across America. (1/3)
When the Trump Admin. decided on a whim to cancel and delay countless American energy projects, they weren't just hiking up costs on our families and businesses, they were killing jobs workers were counting on to make ends meet.
Kristi Noem, Stephen Miller, Donald Trump - they've enabled horrible abuses of U.S. citizens and law-abiding immigrants across the country.
We need accountability, protections for our Constitutional rights, and standards to keep the public safe.
As a former Attorney General, I know what it takes to fight crime in a way that builds community trust and respects Americans' rights. Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller's tactics are the exact opposite.
Nevadans deserve better than the chaos this Administration has unleashed.
A law enforcement recruit in Maine had a valid work permit and already passed a rigorous background check for the opportunity to serve his community, but the Trump Admin. detained him anyway.
They're doing this instead of going after violent criminals like Trump promised to do.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History782 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
782 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-06-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 89 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 89 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 87 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-45) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 87 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 88 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-44) |
| 2025-05-21 | H.J. Res. 88 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 55 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Sustained (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 55 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Sustained (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Motion to Adjourn S.J.Res. 55 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Adjourn Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Ten Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-52) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Fifteen Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Thirty Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for 60 Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Ninety Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Failed (46-52) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S. 1582 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (69-31) |
| 2025-05-19 | S. 1582 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (66-32, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-05-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-05-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-05-15 | S. Res. 195 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.Res. 195 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (45-50) |
| 2025-05-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-43) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-40) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-41) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (72-26) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-05-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-05-08 | S. 1582 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-05-08 | H.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-43) |
| 2025-05-08 | S.J. Res. 7 (119th) | Approve resolution | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Joint Resolution Passed (50-38) |
| 2025-05-07 | S.J. Res. 13 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-47) |
| 2025-05-06 | H.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-05-06 | S.J. Res. 7 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-05-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-05-06 | S.J. Res. 13 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
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.