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

Voting Record — 903
Yes34%
No53%
Present0%
Not Voting13%
Party align92%
Cross-party8%
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 · 61 sponsored · 276 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

I’m hearing from Head Start programs across Arizona. Some can’t make payroll because of budget cuts. Republicans are taking money from our kids to give it to billionaires. That’s the agenda.
While Republicans try to rip healthcare from working families, we’re holding town halls in places they ignore. Thank you, Yavapai Apache Nation and Yavapai County for showing up and speaking out. I’m with you—and I’m not backing down.
22,000 Arizonans are at risk of losing addiction treatment. Not because we can't afford it—but because Republicans would rather give that money to billionaires. We’re not letting that happen without a fight.
🚨Big week for Arizona manufacturing 💥AMD starting chip production in AZ for AI servers 💥NVIDIA using Arizona-made chips for U.S. AI supercomputers That’s the CHIPS Act in action. Tariff tantrums don’t bring jobs back. Smart investment does.
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.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
903 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
2026-07-14—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (50-45)
2026-07-13—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (46-44)
2026-06-24S.J. Res. 185 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50)
2026-06-24—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2026-06-24S.J. Res. 196 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-52)
2026-06-24—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2026-06-24—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (50-44)
2026-06-24—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2026-06-24—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (52-45)
2026-06-24—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2026-06-23H. Con. Res. 86 (119th)Accept House changesYESYES✓Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48)
2026-06-23—Confirm nomineeYESNO✕↔Nomination Confirmed (67-30)
2026-06-22H.R. 6644 (119th)Accept House changesYESYES✓Motion Agreed to (85-5)
2026-06-18—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (48-39)
2026-06-18H.R. 6644 (119th)End debateYESYES✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-8, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-17S. Res. 616 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.Res. 616NOT_VOTINGYES—Motion to Discharge Rejected (44-50)
2026-06-17—End debateNOT_VOTINGNO—Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-41)
2026-06-17—Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNO—Nomination Confirmed (55-39)
2026-06-17—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-41)
2026-06-16H.R. 6644 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Agreed to (87-8)
2026-06-16S.J. Res. 172 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 172YESYES✓Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-48)
2026-06-16S.J. Res. 190 (119th)Begin considerationYESYES✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-48)
2026-06-15—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (48-43)
2026-06-11—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (47-43)
2026-06-11—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (49-44)
2026-06-10—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-44)
2026-06-10—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (50-44)
2026-06-10—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (48-45)
2026-06-09—Confirm nomineeNONO✓Nomination Confirmed (51-46)
2026-06-08—End debateNONO✓Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-42)
2026-06-05—Motion (Motion to Waive All Budgetary Discipline Re: Lee Amdt. No. 5804)NONO✓Motion Rejected (50-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-05S. 2 (119th)Motion (Wyden Motion to Commit S. 2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with Instructions)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (48-51)
2026-06-05S. 1318 (119th)Begin considerationNONO✓Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52)
2026-06-05S. 2 (119th)Final passageNONO✓Bill Passed (52-47)
2026-06-05—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schiff Amdt. No. 5740)YESYES✓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)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (53-46, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-05S. 2 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYES✓Amendment Rejected (45-53)
2026-06-05—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Cassidy Amdt. No. 5812)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-05—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Coons Amdt. No. 5457)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-05S. 2 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYES✓Amendment Rejected (46-53)
2026-06-05S. 2 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYES✓Amendment Rejected (47-52)
2026-06-05S. 2 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYES✓Amendment Rejected (46-53)
2026-06-05S. 2 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYES✓Amendment Rejected (46-53)
2026-06-05—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Durbin Amdt. No. 5806)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (48-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Booker Amdt. No. 5803)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 5485)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5451)NOT_VOTINGYES—Motion Rejected (45-53, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04S. 2 (119th)Motion (Warnock Motion to Commit S. 2 to the Committee on the Judiciary with Instructions)NOT_VOTINGYES—Motion Rejected (46-52)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kim Amdt. No. 5545)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (46-53, 3/5 majority required)
2026-06-04—Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 5501)YESYES✓Motion Rejected (51-47, 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.

← PrevPage 2 / 19Next →