Repealing the Inflation Reduction Act like House Republicans wants would not only destroy American jobs and set us back in meeting our climate goals — it would also make the United States less competitive at a time when we’re beating the competition.
I like winning. Let’s do more.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New Mexico
Martin Heinrich
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 789
Yes32%
No63%
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 · 42 sponsored · 248 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
During a Senate Energy hearing today, I spoke with Energy Deputy Secretary Dave Turk and Treasury Deputy Secretary Wally Adeyemo, highlighting how the Inflation Reduction Act & Bipartisan Infrastructure Law are accelerating a clean energy industrial revolution.
youtu.be/UptDyNKrUM8?...
Farmers are constantly innovating. Our bipartisan Streamlining Conservation Practice Standards Act will help government standards keep pace.
m.farms.com/ag-industry-...
Over the last decade, it’s become clear: assault weapons are driving the devastation we’ve experienced from mass shootings. In 2024, I hope you’ll join me in supporting my #GOSAFEAct to end the carnage.
www.washingtonpost.com/politics/int...
This $1M going to La Casa Family Health Center’s Portales Clinic is an important step in improving access to health care for families in Roosevelt County.
www.easternnewmexiconews.com/story/2023/1...
My recent op-ed on growing the economy in Southern New Mexico, and my years-long and continuing work to deliver the full potential of the Southwest Border Regional Commission.
www.lascrucesbulletin.com/stories/comm...
This is extremely concerning evidence of how the Chinese Communist Party is using TikTok to achieve its political ends.
Recognizing how much I sound like a dad, it needs to be said: Fun videos cannot outweigh our national security.
www.nytimes.com/2023/12/21/b...
Kit Carson Electric Cooperative is leading the way – responsibly and firmly committed to clean energy.
www.hcn.org/issues/56.1/...
Electrification reduces families’ energy costs, helps our climate, and creates jobs.
Grateful for Santa Fe Community College’s work helping to grow our economy by preparing New Mexicans for the next generation of clean energy careers.
nmpoliticalreport.com/news/heinric...
Winter is one of the best seasons for birding in New Mexico. The Sandhill Cranes at Bosque del Apache are a highlight. Here’s a link with info and more options across the state. #NationalBirdsDay <2 days late 🤫🦉>
www.newmexico.org/things-to-do...
On a cold winter day in New Mexico, THIS is how you warm up. @ Si Señor in Farmington.
In the United States of America, we stand for freedom and democracy. The power of our presidency is earned, and our elections are determined at the ballot box.
Our democracy, our country, and our fundamental right as Americans to vote for our leaders in free and fair elections require constant vigilance, bravery, and a dogged commitment to put principles before politics.
In the early hours of January 7th – with rioters’ chants still audible in the distance, injured officers still being treated, & the chaos of ransacked offices & defiled hallways along our path – my colleagues & I returned to the Senate floor to certify the 2020 election results.
The January 6th insurrection will always haunt me. It was a dark day in our country’s history, & its architects must be held accountable. Still, as we commit to this continuing work, we also need to lift up the lessons and legacy of January 7th.
These insurrectionists had 1 goal: to accomplish with force what they failed at the ballot box, but they were no match for the bravery of the U.S. Capitol Police officers, D.C. Metro Police officers, National Guardsmen, & Capitol staff who defended our democracy that day.
Three years ago today, I witnessed rioters breaking police lines to violently force their way into the Capitol. These rioters would go on to attack & injure a number of U.S Capitol Police officers. Instigated & directed by Pres Trump, more than 2,000 rioters entered the Capitol.
Happy birthday, New Mexico. 112 (in state years) looks good on you.
The New Mexico big game draw opens soon. May there be elk backstrap in your future!
The American people and many of us in Congress are demanding more transparency and accountability to ensure that U.S. aid is used only in accordance with U.S. law, international humanitarian law, and the law of armed conflict. This decision does nothing to advance those goals.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History789 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
789 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive Section 305(b)(2) of the CBA re: Cortez Masto Amdt. No. 1690) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-05 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-50) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (5-94) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-51) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-53) |
| 2025-04-04 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-48) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | S.J. Res. 26 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 26 | YES | NO | ✕ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (15-83) |
| 2025-04-03 | S.J. Res. 33 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 33 | YES | NO | ✕ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (15-82) |
| 2025-04-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2025-04-03 | H.J. Res. 24 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (53-42) |
| 2025-04-02 | H.J. Res. 24 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-04-02 | S.J. Res. 37 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-48) |
| 2025-04-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-04-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-04-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-03-31 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-42) |
| 2025-03-27 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-03-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-03-27 | S.J. Res. 18 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-48) |
| 2025-03-26 | S.J. Res. 18 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-03-26 | H.J. Res. 25 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Joint Resolution Passed (70-28) |
| 2025-03-26 | H.J. Res. 25 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-03-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-44) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-44) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
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.