A tearful moment that shouldn't go unnoticed.
Watch my friend @booker.senate.gov so passionately call out Trump and Elon Musk's complete betrayal of our Veterans.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Illinois
Tammy Duckworth
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 782
Yes27%
No66%
Present0%
Not Voting7%
Party align97%
Cross-party2%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Tammy Duckworth
U.S. SenatorDemocratIllinois
SoupScore
Tammy's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 48 sponsored · 361 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Another important moment in Congress yesterday.
With their futile attempt to block new parents from voting remotely, Republican leaders once again proved they're not actually pro-family.
Not on this. Not on IVF. Not on lowering costs for middle-class families.
Not on anything.
Millions of people are autistic—our neighbors, friends and loved ones. Yet, too many do not have equal opportunities.
Today, on World Autism Awareness Day, we reaffirm our commitment to making our global community more inclusive, accessible and just for everyone.
This is a moment for the history books.
I’m deeply impressed with my friend @booker.senate.gov for the good trouble he’s making, and I’m proud to work alongside him as we fight back against Musk and Trump’s efforts to turn our democracy into an oligarchy. abcnews.go.com/Politics/boo...
Our farmers have been hit with body blow after body blow by this Trump-Musk oligarchy.
This Administration is failing to live up to the promises it’s made to our farmers.
I asked Senator Cory Booker if he heard from any Veterans in New Jersey who have been fired by Trump and Musk.
His answer? Yes. Yes. YES.
Well, I greatly look forward to my Republican colleagues joining me in calls for an investigation with the same urgency… and intensity…
As they did over “her emails.”
www.washingtonpost.com/national-sec...
Trump is gutting the VA and firing more Veterans than any other President in modern history.
It’s a complete betrayal to those who answer the call to defend us.
I’m helping Senator Booker hold the floor to show that unlike Republicans—
Democrats have our heroes’ backs.
BREAKING: I'm introducing the IVF for Military Families Act with Rep. Jacobs which would help ensure IVF costs are covered for our servicemembers who rely on it to build their families.
If Trump really wants to keep his promise on IVF, supporting this should be easy. abcnews.go.com/Politics/dem...
As Trump and Republicans' actively work to tear down the rights of transgender Americans, let's send a clear message this Transgender Day of Visibility:
No matter who you are, you are seen, you are valued and you belong—
In our schools.
In our military.
Everywhere.
Wishing a blessed and safe Eid al-Fitr filled with peace, joy and time with loved ones to all of our Muslim neighbors across the country who are celebrating.
Eid Mubarak!
If Republicans really care about our Veterans, then they should put their votes where their mouths are and help pass our bill to give Veterans fired by Trump their jobs back.
Otherwise, it's just more lip service.
Another Trump action that will hurt Veterans and the workers who serve them.
The betrayal never stops.
www.npr.org/2025/03/28/n...
It's like Trump is going out of his way to raise as many everyday costs as he possibly can. www.cbsnews.com/news/trumps-...
What other classified info is Hegseth sharing on Signal chats? Clearly, he can't be trusted to keep our military secrets—or our troops—safe.
We have Senate committees for a reason.
SSCI, SASC and SFRC must hold hearings to investigate this egregious breach and potential others.
Pilot to Hegseth: "You’re going to kill somebody.”
For the safety of our troops, Hegseth has got to go.
Pete Hegseth is a f*cking liar. This is so clearly classified info he recklessly leaked that could’ve gotten our pilots killed.
He needs to resign in disgrace immediately.
Does Pete Hegseth care that he put the lives of our servicemembers at greater risk? It's unacceptable.
Everyone in that Signal chat needs to lose their jobs.
Pete Hegseth and every single other official on that Signal chain should lose their jobs.
They must answer for this egregious national security breach.
Protocol is clear. Every single official on that Signal chain needs to hand over their mobile devices.
Pete Hegseth, JD Vance, Marco Rubio—all of them.
This is a matter of national security and the rule of law.
If it were anyone else, Republicans would call for this too.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-02-03 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-44) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-40) |
| 2026-02-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-40) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (71-29, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 4287) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (58-42) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (58-42) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (67-33) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (32-67) |
| 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) | Approve resolution | 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 | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (71-29) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (69-27) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (67-30) |
| 2025-12-17 | — | End debate | NO | 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) | Approve resolution | 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 | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-12-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | 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) |
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.