Tammy Duckworth headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Illinois
Born
March 12, 1968
Age 58
Phone
(202) 224-2854
Office
524 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Illinois

Tammy Duckworth

Ladda Tammy Duckworth is an American politician and Army National Guard veteran serving as the junior United States senator from Illinois, a seat she has held since 2017. A member of the Democratic Party, she represented Illinois's 8th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2013 to 2017.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 841
Yes29%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting7%
Party align97%
Cross-party2%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Tammy Duckworth headshot
Tammy Duckworth
U.S. SenatorDemocratIllinois
SoupScore
Tammy's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 52 sponsored · 381 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

NEWS: The Senate just passed the biggest housing bill in 30 years! With the median age of first-time homebuyers at a record high, our bipartisan ROAD to Housing Act would: — Build more homes — Lower housing costs — Stop Wall Street from buying up homes Next up, the House.
An outrageous attack on the rights and independence of the disability community. We will not let Trump’s DOJ drag us back to a time when Americans with disabilities were institutionalized against their will and ripped away from their families. Period.
Trump DOJ Outlines Dubious Path to Force People into Psychiatric Institutions
NEWS: I’m calling on the FAA to reject any pressure to rubberstamp Trump’s “Triumphal Arch.” The safety of the flying public should not be jeopardized for a vanity project designed to stroke the President’s ego.
A letter sent by U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth demanding the FAA reject any efforts from Trump to waste time and resources on his “Triumphal Arch.” Full letter can be found on the Senator’s website. Link in bio.
Heartbroken for the eight brave servicemembers who perished in today's crash at Edwards Air Force Base in California. Their service to our nation can never be repaid, but we owe it to them and their families to try.
Trump must provide the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with a detailed briefing on the terms of this “deal” immediately. We need answers ASAP on how exactly this agreement would solve anything for the American people—if it even holds at all.
America is not better off than we were before. This war has cost 14 of our troops' lives and burned through $30 billion. Our economy is in shambles. It’s a total failure.
Under this "deal," we would be lifting sanctions and essentially be paying Iran to stop this war that Trump started. All while Americans continue suffering at the pump, grocery store and elsewhere as a direct result.
And don’t forget, Trump originally said he wanted “regime change.” But Iran is now led by a younger, more extreme Ayatollah who he’s just empowered with all these concessions.
So Trump just gifted Iran a new way to profit off a public waterway—and it may embolden other countries to follow suit. When I met with our Indo-Pacific partners recently, this was a huge concern. Our global economy only works when trade can run through international waters.
Iran's only concession isn't even a concession. Reopening a Strait that was open before the war began is not a "win" for us. And it won’t go back to how it was. Iran won't charge tolls for 60 days, but it may charge “fees.”
It also doesn’t stop Iran's strategy of arming rogue groups in the region. In fact, it seems like the Administration might hand Iran a cash infusion. $24 billion of frozen assets might be handed over. Almost as much as this war has already cost taxpayers.
This "deal" is only a 60-day ceasefire that doesn’t keep a nuclear weapon out of Iran's hands. There is no new pledge. No monitoring. Nothing like what we had under the JCPOA.
An “end” to this illegal and expensive war is all anyone has asked for for over 100 days, but we've seen the President's deals fall apart before. And ultimately, the main takeaway is that Trump has failed to deliver on every possible end state he's proposed. Let me explain.
This is who Trump deems “the worst of the worst." The wife of a 20-year Army and Texas National Guard Veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Snatching up our troops’ loved ones is no way to repay our military families.
10 years ago, one of the deadliest shootings in our nation's history took place at Pulse nightclub in Orlando. 49 were killed. Dozens more were injured. A night of terror, pain and loss for the LGBTQ+ community. Today, we remember the victims and their loved ones.
NEWS: In a complete reversal, Senate Republicans threw out my bill that would cover IVF for our servicemembers in the next defense bill. They supported it last year. And the year before. But this year, they chose to betray our heroes who dream of having a family. Outrageous.
Posts page 1Older posts →
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
841 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
2026-06-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2026-06-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2026-05-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-47)
2026-05-19S.J. Res. 185 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 185YESYESMotion to Discharge Agreed to (50-47)
2026-05-19End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-47)
2026-05-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-38)
2026-05-19End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-38)
2026-05-18S. Res. 690 (119th)Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (46-43)
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 debateNONOCloture 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)

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 2 / 17Next →