My son in the Boundary Waters. This is what’s under attack by the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress. Channel your inner Teddy Roosevelt and call your Senators!
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New Mexico
Martin Heinrich
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 890
Yes34%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align93%
Cross-party6%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Martin Heinrich
U.S. SenatorDemocratNew Mexico
SoupScore
Martin's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 55 sponsored · 281 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
And to think, I could’ve been watching Kid Rock.
Republicans in the U.S. Senate are coming for your public lands once again.
I am so proud to be a New Mexican.
They will never take our public lands from our public hands.
It seems like every day the President finds a new way to embarrass himself and the nation. I hope my colleagues can summon the decency to condemn him.
Stopped by KOB4 to chat with Giuli Frendak. Tune in later today for more.
Reposted bySenator Martin Heinrich
Another illegal stop work order overturned. It was never about national security. It’s all about Trump’s war on cheap, clean power.
The Trump economy is great if you're one of Trump's billionaire friends. How's the economy treating you?
This includes my bill to repeal the provision that would have let some Republican senators collect hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for legally obtained phone records. Politicians should be fighting for working families instead of fighting to line their own pockets.
My constituents are clear, and so am I: no DHS funding without a restoration to the rule of law.
Low carbon leadership in Las Cruces!
Which of these looks likes an insurrectionist?
We need a restoration of the rule of law.
Now playing.
This funding means real wins for Gallup: saving the city from an additional $70 million in costs for the Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project and providing $115,000 to help the Gallup Police Department solve crimes — delivering clean water and keeping families safe.
Good Riddance. But Kristi Noem lied about what we saw with our own eyes. She needs to go, too. Immediately.
Thanks, Senator Berghmans. Clean energy isn’t just good for our state’s economy, it’s good for New Mexicans’ wallets.
Trump promised to lower costs on day one – instead, he made it worse. The one thing President Trump delivered for New Mexico families in 2025 was higher prices, and it’s hitting families hard.
We need to lower costs for New Mexicans NOW. Working families can’t afford to wait.
Another American killed by Donald Trump’s invasion force in Minneapolis. Shot 5 times AFTER being restrained. This is not the America I know, but I do know THIS…
This invasion of an American city is only possible because Republicans are complicit and refuse to rein in this madness.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History890 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
890 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-05-08 | S. 1582 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-05-08 | H.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-43) |
| 2025-05-08 | S.J. Res. 7 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-38) |
| 2025-05-07 | S.J. Res. 13 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-47) |
| 2025-05-06 | H.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-05-06 | S.J. Res. 7 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-05-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-05-06 | S.J. Res. 13 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-05-06 | H.J. Res. 61 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (55-45) |
| 2025-05-05 | H.J. Res. 61 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2025-05-01 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-05-01 | S.J. Res. 31 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-46) |
| 2025-05-01 | H.J. Res. 75 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-30 | S.J. Res. 31 (119th) | Begin consideration | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-40) |
| 2025-04-30 | S.J. Res. 49 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (49-49, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea) |
| 2025-04-30 | S.J. Res. 49 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (49-49) |
| 2025-04-30 | H.J. Res. 75 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-04-30 | H.J. Res. 42 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-46) |
| 2025-04-29 | H.J. Res. 42 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (83-14) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-13) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-36) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-36) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-39) |
| 2025-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (67-29) |
| 2025-04-28 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (64-27) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (60-25) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-25) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (59-26) |
| 2025-04-11 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-25) |
| 2025-04-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-46) |
| 2025-04-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-04-10 | H.J. Res. 20 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (53-44) |
| 2025-04-09 | H.J. Res. 20 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-42) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-37) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-04-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-42) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-44) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-37) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (66-32) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (67-32) |
| 2025-04-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-04-07 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-39) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
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.