It's a simple question: are tariffs a tax?
The families in Nevada that are having to pay more for their everyday needs know the answer is yes.
But Donald Trump's Treasury appointees don't have the courage to stand up to the President and tell the truth to the American people.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Nevada
Catherine Cortez Masto
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 890
Yes36%
No63%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align92%
Cross-party8%
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 · 118 sponsored · 271 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Senate Republicans chose to let kids and seniors in Nevada go hungry so they could give out more tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy.
The cost of child care is soaring. But instead of working to lower those costs, Senate Republicans passed tax cuts for billionaires.
So I joined my colleagues to reintroduce the Child Care for Working Families Act that focuses on bringing down those costs for middle-class families.
At this very moment while Republicans are trying to gut public broadcasting, Alaska public radio is helping Alaskans stay safe from an earthquake that hit just minutes ago.
If you care about our communities’ safety, call your Senators and tell them to vote no on the GOP cuts.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is essential for keeping families informed about natural disasters, evacuations, and safety measures that save lives in Nevada.
I'm pushing to stop the Republican cuts that could put our communities at risk.
Here’s the preview of today for all of you at home:
Senate Republicans are going to beat their chest about how we need to cut kids’ educational programs and rural broadcasting at PBS because of the debt but they won’t say a word about the $4 trillion they added to the debt for billionaire tax cuts.
The "Department of Government Efficiency" would rather burn food than feed hungry children.
This is unbelievably horrific, and a new low for this short-sighted and cruel administration.
The administration will incinerate enough food to feed 1.5 million children for a week. When it burns, its label will read: THIS PRODUCT IS A GIFT FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 500 tons, from us, to no one.
www.theatlantic.com/health/archi...
Republicans passed a bill that doesn't just gut Medicaid, it will make it harder for Nevadans with Medicare and private insurance to get their care, too.
And in some of our rural communities, it could mean clinics and hospitals close completely.
news3lv.com/news/local/c...
By canceling projects for low-cost energy in Nevada, Donald Trump and Republicans have passed into law a $300 per month increase in Nevadans' power bills.
All so billionaires can get a tax cut.
Greg LeMond is a Nevada icon, an incredible cyclist, and a passionate advocate for children and victims of sexual assault. It was my honor to support his nomination for a Congressional Gold Medal, and it's wonderful to see him recognized today for his advocacy and talent.
If you live in rural Nevada and your local clinic closes down because of Senate Republicans' Medicaid cuts, the next nearest option might be hundreds of miles away. In an emergency, that's a life-or-death difference.
This is what Senate Republicans voted for.
PBS Reno is making a real difference in the lives of kids across Northern Nevada. Unfortunately, President Trump now wants to cut this funding.
The GOP was happy to give out trillions to the ultra-wealthy last week. But now, funding our kids' education is a step too far.
Senate Republicans voted yesterday to hand every taxpayer a $26,000 bill for their billionaire tax cuts.
Altogether, it's $4 trillion in debt just so the ultra-wealthy can get richer. Unbelievable.
Make no mistake: Republicans are responsible for the devastating impacts that will come from this bill. I will continue to put a spotlight on how these disastrous cuts are causing harm to Nevadans.
This morning, Senate Republicans voted to raise costs on working families, rip health care from Nevadans who need it, and kill good-paying jobs across our state to ensure their billionaire friends save on their taxes.
Carly is supposed to start a job training program tomorrow through Medicaid, but her family is worried about her future if the Republicans pass their Medicaid cuts tonight.
For Carly, Gina, and thousands of Nevadans like them, Medicaid is a lifeline worth defending.
Without Medicaid, Pam from Reno wouldn't be able to provide her son with the care he needs. It's shameful that Republicans want to move ahead with Medicaid cuts that could put Carson's coverage at risk.
Thank you Pam for speaking out and being in this fight to protect Medicaid.
Republicans' tax scam bill is a bad deal for America, and they should withdraw it completely and start from scratch on a bipartisan basis to deliver real relief for working families.
But they won't - so I'll keep working to stand up for Nevadans. (6/6)
And, I'm introducing an amendment to prevent any part of this bill from raising out of pocket costs on seniors' Medicare or prescription drugs. (5/6)
Third, I'm introducing an amendment to prevent millions of school children from losing access to school meals due to the Republican tax scam bill.
No child should go hungry at school so Senate Republicans can send trillions of dollars to the ultra-wealthy. (4/6)
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History890 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
890 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-18 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-39) |
| 2026-06-18 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-8, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-17 | S. Res. 616 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.Res. 616 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (44-50) |
| 2026-06-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-41) |
| 2026-06-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (55-39) |
| 2026-06-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-41) |
| 2026-06-16 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (87-8) |
| 2026-06-16 | S.J. Res. 172 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 172 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-48) |
| 2026-06-16 | S.J. Res. 190 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-48) |
| 2026-06-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-43) |
| 2026-06-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (47-43) |
| 2026-06-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2026-06-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-44) |
| 2026-06-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-44) |
| 2026-06-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2026-06-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2026-06-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-42) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Budgetary Discipline Re: Lee Amdt. No. 5804) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (50-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Motion (Wyden Motion to Commit S. 2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-51) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 1318 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (52-47) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schiff Amdt. No. 5740) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 5632) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (53-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (45-53) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Cassidy Amdt. No. 5812) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Coons Amdt. No. 5457) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2026-06-05 | S. 2 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2026-06-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Durbin Amdt. No. 5806) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Booker Amdt. No. 5803) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 5485) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5451) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | S. 2 (119th) | Motion (Warnock Motion to Commit S. 2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kim Amdt. No. 5545) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 5501) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (51-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Graham Amdt. No. 5779) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 5556) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hassan Amdt. No. 5535) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | S. 2 (119th) | Motion (Ossoff Motion to Commit S. 2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with Instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 5514) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 5512) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (53-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-06-04 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Tillis Amdt. No. 5452) | YES | NO | ✕ | Motion Rejected (15-84) |
| 2026-06-04 | S. 2 (119th) | Motion (Schumer motion to commit S.2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with instructions) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-50) |
| 2026-06-03 | S. 2 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2026-06-03 | S.J. Res. 188 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-53) |
| 2026-06-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2026-06-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2026-06-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
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.