We need common sense border security solutions. This isn’t it.
Pulling agents off their jobs hunting down child abusers makes our communities more dangerous.
www.reuters.com/world/us/tho...
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Arizona
Ruben Gallego
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 783
Yes33%
No54%
Present0%
Not Voting13%
Party align91%
Cross-party9%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Ruben Gallego
U.S. SenatorDemocratArizona
SoupScore
Ruben's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 51 sponsored · 238 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Stopped by Blueberry Cafe for lunch in Douglas! Small businesses like this make our state great
Thanks to Alex and all the staff for having me!
Transitional housing programs like the one I just toured help
our service members successfully transition to civilian life.
But they’re under threat by DOGE. I won’t let Elon Musk, a man who has zero idea what it means to serve, gut funding for our veterans.
Elon Musk is only working for himself
Donald Trump just gave the order to dismantle the Department of Education. He wants fewer resources for teachers and fewer opportunities for our kids—just so his billionaire friends can get richer.
On the 22nd anniversary of the Iraq War, we should be honoring those who served—not turning our backs on them.
But Trump and Elon Musk are gutting the VA, making it harder for veterans to get the care they earned. It’s shameful. We’re fighting back.
The Nogales-Dennis DeConcini Port of Entry is an economic engine and on the front line in the fight against fentanyl.
Yesterday, I saw firsthand how funding we secured will boost trade, create jobs, and stop fentanyl at the border.
Stronger border. Stronger economy. Safer Arizona.
I’m demanding answers from the Trump administration. We won’t let Trump take a wrecking ball to public education.
Im fighting for a secure, efficient border. That’s a win for Arizona.
Yesterday in Douglas, I toured the Raul Hector Castro Port of Entry.
We’ve already secured $400M to improve the port, but we need to do more and keep pushing to BOOST trade and STOP the flow of fentanyl.
I’ll tell you what I told the veterans and families who joined us today in Sierra Vista.
You deserve better than an administration that turns its back on you. I won’t stop fighting for the men and women who fought for our country.
Today we were in Douglas, AZ for our second Save Medicaid town hall.
For 30% of rural Arizonans, Medicaid is a lifeline. If Republicans follow through on their budget plans to gut it, these are the people who will pay the price. We can’t let it happen.
Answering your questions!
Sign up for our Sierra Vista town hall here: forms.office.com/pages/respon...
Sign up for our Douglas town hall here: forms.office.com/pages/respon...
Can't wait to see you today Cochise County!
30% of rural Arizonans rely on Medicaid. Cut it, and rural hospitals shut down—leaving many with costly helicopter rides as their only choice to get to emergency care.
It's not safe, it's not smart, and we won’t let it happen.
Arizona, we hear you. Thank you for joining us in Phoenix for our first Save Medicaid Town Hall—Senator Kelly and I aren’t backing down
Para la comunidad hispanohablante--por favor llamen a sus congresistas y diles que no recorten Medicaid (también conocido como AHCCCS en Arizona).
Trump y los republicanos quieren quitárselo.
Thank you for showing up and telling your stories. We’re in this fight with you
This is shameful.
The Navajo Code Talkers were Marines and heroes who helped this country secure victory in WWII. We owe them a debt that can never be repaid.
Trump can’t erase their history just because he feels like it.
www.axios.com/local/salt-l...
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History783 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
783 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-09-29 | S. 2806 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (37-61, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-09-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-45) |
| 2025-09-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (47-43) |
| 2025-09-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (47-45) |
| 2025-09-19 | H.R. 5371 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Defeated (44-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-19 | S. 2882 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Defeated (47-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-18 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | Decision of the Chair PN12-19 and PN25-28 and PN12-45 and PN22-1 and PN22-2 and PN22-5 and PN22-27 and PN22-20 and PN22-21 and PN26-8 and PN26-34 and PN26-35 and PN55-41 and PN22-4 and PN22-8 and PN22-19 and PN26-1 and PN22-23 and PN25-40 and PN26-7 and PN26-19 and PN26-31 and PN60-3 and PN26-44 and PN25-2 and PN55-16 and PN60-9 and PN60-10 and PN129-8 and PN26-45 and PN141-37 and PN141-7 and PN141-28 and PN12-22 and PN25-21 and PN22-3 and PN26-22 and PN13-5 and PN22-24 and PN25-33 and PN141-18 and PN150-5 and PN345-16 and PN55-42 and PN54-6 and PN54-7 and PN55-45 and PN55-25 | YES | YES | ✓ | Decision of Chair Not Sustained (47-52) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | Motion to Reconsider PN55-25 and PN55-45 and PN54-7 and PN54-6 and PN55-42 and PN345-16 and PN150-5 and PN141-18 and PN25-33 and PN22-24 and PN13-5 and PN26-22 and PN22-3 and PN25-21 and PN12-22 and PN141-28 and PN141-7 and PN141-37 and PN26-45 and PN129-8 and PN60-10 and PN60-9 and PN55-16 and PN25-2 and PN26-44 and PN60-3 and PN26-31 and PN26-19 and PN26-7 and PN25-40 and PN22-23 and PN26-1 and PN22-19 and PN22-8 and PN22-4 and PN55-41 and PN26-35 and PN26-34 and PN26-8 and PN22-21 and PN22-20 and PN22-27 and PN22-5 and PN22-2 and PN22-1 and PN12-45 and PN12-19 and PN25-28 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Reconsider Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-16 | S. Con. Res. 22 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (36-62) |
| 2025-09-16 | S.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-47) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2025-09-15 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (51-44) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Decision of the Chair S.Res. 377 | YES | YES | ✓ | Decision of Chair Not Sustained (45-53) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Motion to Reconsider S.Res. 377 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Reconsider Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-10 | S. 2296 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-09-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-43) |
| 2025-09-04 | S. 2296 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-02 | S. 2296 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-14, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (71-23) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | — | — | Nomination Confirmed (72-22) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (59-35) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (52-42) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Nomination Confirmed (78-17) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-19) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (53-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-41) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
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.