Amy Klobuchar headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Minnesota
Born
May 25, 1960
Age 65
Phone
(202) 224-3244
Office
425 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Minnesota

Amy Klobuchar

Amy Jean Klobuchar is an American politician and lawyer serving as the senior United States senator from Minnesota, a seat she has held since 2007. A member of the Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party (DFL), Minnesota's affiliate of the Democratic Party, she previously served as the county attorney of Hennepin County, Minnesota.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 774
Yes33%
No66%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align94%
Cross-party6%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Amy Klobuchar headshot
Amy Klobuchar
U.S. SenatorDemocratMinnesota
SoupScore
Amy's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 87 sponsored · 403 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

The administration is hiding who is paying for Trump’s gilded ballroom.   And many of the big donors giving Trump money have a reason to … they want the administration’s signoff on their deals.   This is corruption, plain and simple.
NEW: The WH did not disclose several donors to the ballroom who have business before Trump: ▶️Jeff Yass, investor in TikTok parent company: $2.5m+ to ballroom ▶️BlackRock, trying to buy Panama Canal ports: $2.5m+ ▶️Extremity Care, Medicare reimbursement issues: $2.5m ▶️Vantive, Medicare reimbursement
I met Christi, a small business owner from Eagan whose employee, a cancer survivor, is seeing his family’s health costs rise by $400 a month. Christi helps pay for his premiums, doing everything she can to keep him insured. This is who we’re fighting for.
The courts have ordered the administration to use its contingency fund for SNAP—and have made clear it can use its transfer authorities to fully fund SNAP. It is not enough to do the bare minimum—they should do everything they can to ensure Americans put food on the table.
AI presents many opportunities for innovation, but there are risks that we need to address. We need common-sense rules of the road like our bipartisan NO FAKES Act, which is even supported by Google, to protect people’s voice and image from being used in unauthorized deepfakes.
Christi runs a small business in Eagan, MN and helps pay her employee's premiums. Now those costs are skyrocketing because Congressional Republicans refuse to extend the health care tax credits. We must prevent these price hikes.
Today enrollment for health insurance opens and millions of Americans including breast cancer survivors will see their premiums double. The President needs to come to the table and work with us to extend the health care tax credits so Americans don’t lose their care.
🚨 A second judge grants a temporary restraining order requiring USDA to provide SNAP using contingency funding “as soon as possible.” Trump has no excuse: He cannot take food assistance away from families in need.
GOOD NEWS: A judge ruled the administration is required by law to use emergency funding to provide food assistance to families in need. Trump has no excuse to withhold food assistance. If the admin does not issue SNAP, it is purely a cruel political decision, not a legal one.
GOOD NEWS: A judge ruled the administration is required by law to use emergency funding to provide food assistance to families in need. Trump has no excuse to withhold food assistance. If the admin does not issue SNAP, it is purely a cruel political decision, not a legal one.
Since the Administration is refusing to help Americans in need, we are standing by to vote for bills to ensure continued access to food assistance. Why won’t Republicans call up these bills for a vote? They'd rather let kids go hungry than risk a vote on the Epstein files.
NEWS: The Senate is standing up for the Constitution and taking on Trump’s chaotic tariffs. This week we’ve passed bills to: Today: Overturn Trump’s across-the-board tariffs Yesterday: Overturn the tariffs on Canada Tuesday: Overturn the tariffs on Brazil
Tens of millions of Americans, including about 4 million Texans, are standing on the edge of a health care premium cliff. Without the health care tax credits, the average annual premium for these Texas families will more than double. Senate Democrats are fighting to stop that.
I went to the Senate floor to make the case for the resolution I lead with Senator Kaine to overturn the punishing Canadian tariffs. No way to treat an ally 🇨🇦 and no way to treat the American people. It passed the Senate! The House needs to come back and act.
Trump’s tariffs are a nearly $2,000 tax on American families. The Senate is taking action by repealing his corrupt tariffs on Brazil, and we will vote to stop his tariffs on Canada next. The House needs to return to work and reverse these tariff taxes and actually lower costs.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
774 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
2026-05-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-44)
2026-05-11S. Res. 690 (119th)Resolution S.Res. 690NONOResolution Agreed to (46-45)
2026-04-30S.J. Res. 184 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-30S. Res. 690 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 99 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-50)
2026-04-29S.J. Res. 139 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-29Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2026-04-28S.J. Res. 124 (119th)Point of Order S.J.Res. 124NONOPoint of Order Well Taken (51-47)
2026-04-28S. Res. 690 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2026-04-27End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-37)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Accept House changesNONOConcurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-49)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-50)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-52)
2026-04-23S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (25-73)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794)NONOMotion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-23Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414)NONOMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 4956)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hirono Amdt. No. 4884)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Agreed to (98-0)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required)
2026-04-22S.J. Res. 114 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (46-51)
2026-04-21S. Con. Res. 33 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2026-04-20Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (47-46)
2026-04-16End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-48)
2026-04-16H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 140NONOJoint Resolution Passed (50-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49)
2026-04-15H.J. Res. 140 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-48)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 138 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 138YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (36-63)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 32 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 32YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (40-59)
2026-04-15S.J. Res. 123 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 123YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-52)
2026-04-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2026-04-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2026-04-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-46)
2026-04-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2026-03-26H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-26S. 1383 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (53-47, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-25S.J. Res. 103 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (48-50)
2026-03-25H.R. 7147 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-46, 3/5 majority required)
2026-03-25S.J. Res. 107 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-24S.J. Res. 116 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 116YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-53)
2026-03-24S. 1383 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (53-47)
2026-03-24S. 1383 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (53-47)
2026-03-24Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47)

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.

Page 1 / 16Next →