Ruben Gallego headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Arizona
Born
November 20, 1979
Age 46
Phone
(202) 224-4521
Office
302 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Arizona

Ruben Gallego

Rubén Marinelarena Gallego is an American politician and Marine Corps veteran serving since 2025 as the junior United States senator from Arizona. A member of the Democratic Party, he served from 2015 to 2025 as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Arizona and from 2011 to 2014 as a member of the Arizona House of Representatives.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 783
Yes33%
No54%
Present0%
Not Voting13%
Party align91%
Cross-party9%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Ruben Gallego headshot
Ruben Gallego
U.S. SenatorDemocratArizona
SoupScore
Ruben's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 51 sponsored · 238 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Tomatoes are about to get a lot more expensive. Trump just announced he’s going to put a special tax on tomatoes. That’s bad news for your grocery budget. I’m demanding the administration reverses this. Arizona families can’t afford it.
"I’m too old for this. I just really want to be retired." That’s what one Arizonan said after watching her savings get rocked by Trump’s chaos economy. Our seniors worked hard their whole lives. They deserve to retire with peace of mind.
We ended in London, where I spoke at Chatham House about the threats posed by Russia and China—and how the U.S. must continue leading alongside our allies to meet the moment and shape the future of global security.
I also sat down with German finance and defense ministers to discuss tariffs, defense spending, and how we can work together to keep the global economy strong and our democracies secure. And I spoke with some incredible U.S. Marines serving in Europe.
In Slovakia, I met with the Prime Minister to discuss the importance of standing up to Russian aggression in Ukraine. I returned to Nesvady—where I once taught English—and met with leaders of the Slovak Jewish community to talk about the urgent fight against rising antisemitism.
🧵Just wrapped a bipartisan trip to Europe. We met with allies, defense officials, and diplomatic partners to reaffirm our shared commitment to security, democracy, and stability across the globe.
Arizona’s small and Tribal police departments don’t have massive budgets or endless backup — but they show up every day to protect our communities. I’m backing the bipartisan Invest to Protect Act of 2025 to get them the resources they need to keep Arizona safe.
Today is Tax Day. But because of Elon Musk and DOGE, Americans might wait longer for their refunds. We should be focused on giving hardworking families a tax break, not making the ultra rich richer.
This is going to raise prices at the grocery store. There’s no question about it. Arizona businesses and shoppers will be harmed because this administration cares more about the profit margins of billionaires instead of lowering costs.
Families in Arizona are already stretching every dollar at the grocery store. Now Congressional Republicans want to slash food assistance by billions of dollars just to give tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy.
Arizona is in the midst of a housing crisis, and too often our disabled veterans are impacted the most. This week, I introduced a bipartisan bill that makes a commonsense fix to aid eligibility—so more disabled veterans can access safe, affordable housing.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
783 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
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-21Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 233)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (24-76)
2025-02-21S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-21Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-51)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 776)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (51-49)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 925)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-53)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 130)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-52)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Klobuchar Amdt. No. 494)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 454)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-02-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-49)
2025-02-20End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-02-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-02-18S. Con. Res. 7 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47)
2025-02-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-02-18Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (48-45)
2025-02-13End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-43)
2025-02-13End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-02-13Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (72-28)
2025-02-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2025-02-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (55-44)
2025-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-45)

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 15 / 16Next →