I’m a NO on the DHS funding bill that allows ICE to keep terrorizing our communities.
ICE’s conduct this past year is beyond comprehension. Now, Trump is asking Congress for more funding. No way.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Colorado
John W. Hickenlooper
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 776
Yes31%
No68%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align94%
Cross-party5%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
John W. Hickenlooper
U.S. SenatorDemocratColorado
SoupScore
John W.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 32 sponsored · 229 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Toured Byers High School’s Career and Technical Education program, which helps equip our next generation with the skills they need to succeed. Expanding workforce programs like these are a no-brainer. Let’s get to work!
Trump’s reckless threats (and confusion) towards Greenland weakens NATO and does nothing to lower costs for working families who are suffering under his economy.
This is how Trump’s Big Ugly Betrayal Act left our rural communities like Hugo out to dry.
It’s treasures like these that Trump and his BLM nominee Steve Pearce, a fierce advocate for selling off our public lands, want to take away from us.
I’m a NO on Steve Pearce. Colorado’s public lands are NEVER for sale.
Denver’s annual Marade is a reminder of Dr. King’s legacy: that our shared humanity and love will conquer all in our work towards a more perfect union.
Today, we joined Denver’s annual Marade. It’s in times like these that we must keep Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy in our hearts to fight for a more perfect nation that’s built on liberty and justice for all.
Prices continue to soar for working Americans while Trump is too busy building a ballroom and throwing parties at Mar-a-Lago.
Trump’s reckless tariffs are crushing small businesses when we should be doing all we can to lift them up.
We met with small business leaders in Denver to discuss the impacts rising costs are having on their businesses and hear more about how we can help.
NCAR is a crown jewel of research, not only in the U.S., but around the world.
Every single American relies on NCAR’s data. www.forbes.com/sites/marsha...
After weeks of holding up the funding package to push back against Trump’s attacks on Colorado, we held the Senate floor yesterday to demand a vote on our amendment to fully fund NCAR.
Republicans blocked it. But our fight against the administration’s attacks on science isn’t over.
Talk about waste, fraud, and abuse!
Rebranding the Department of Defense to the Department of War, as per President Donald Trump’s September executive order, could cost up to $125 million, the Congressional Budget Office said in an estimate. https://cnn.it/4qnYuYF
We were on the Senate floor today to stand up against Trump’s attacks on Colorado and to disrupt the Senate spending package that does nothing to protect NCAR. Watch my speech in full here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBtD...
Congress has the constitutional responsibility to decide when America goes to war.
Americans are struggling to afford groceries and health care here at home under President Trump. They don’t want him throwing us into another forever war to enrich oil executives.
Women deserve the right to make their own reproductive health care decisions. Mifepristone is a safe, effective, and FDA-approved medication.
We’ll always fight for mifepristone to remain legal and accessible so women can get the care they need.
Soaring health care costs are squeezing millions of families. Affordable health care should be a top priority for Congress.
Yet, Republicans just blocked a clean, three-year extension of the ACA enhanced premium tax credits that already passed the House in a bipartisan vote.
Lower costs and affordable health care. Why can’t President Trump get it in his head that’s what Americans want?
This was already struck down by a federal court last month. Directly after, we visited the Aurora ICE facility to ensure they were following the order. Now, Sec. Noem has found a loophole. We’ve fought this before, we’ll fight this again. Congressional oversight is constitutionally required.
NEWS: A day after the Minneapolis shooting, Secretary Noem quietly signed a new policy barring congressional visits to ICE facilities without a week's advance notice. That policy change led to three MN Dems being blocked from accessing an ICE facility today. www.politico.com/news/2026/01...
It was great to be at the National Western Stock Show in Denver to chat with folks from all across the state!
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History776 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
776 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 776) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 925) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 130) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Klobuchar Amdt. No. 494) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 454) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-49) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-02-18 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-02-18 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-02-18 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (72-28) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2025-02-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2025-02-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (55-44) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-45) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-46) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (77-23) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (59-38) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-35) |
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.