Amy Klobuchar headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Minnesota
Born
May 25, 1960
Age 66
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

Voting Record — 890
Yes35%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align94%
Cross-party5%
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 · 95 sponsored · 461 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

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
890 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
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Accept House changesNONOConcurrent Resolution Agreed to (51-48)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-05Motion (Motion to Waive Section 305(b)(2) of the CBA re: Cortez Masto Amdt. No. 1690)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-50, 3/5 majority required)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-52)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-05H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (49-50)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Rejected (5-94)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-53)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-53)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (47-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (48-51)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-53)
2025-04-04H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (51-48)
2025-04-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-04-03H. Con. Res. 14 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-48)
2025-04-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-04-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-04-03S.J. Res. 26 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 26NONOMotion to Discharge Rejected (15-83)
2025-04-03S.J. Res. 33 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 33NONOMotion to Discharge Rejected (15-82)
2025-04-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-04-03H.J. Res. 24 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (53-42)
2025-04-02H.J. Res. 24 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-04-02S.J. Res. 37 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Passed (51-48)
2025-04-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-04-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-04-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-03-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-42)
2025-03-27Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-03-27End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-03-27S.J. Res. 18 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-48)
2025-03-26S.J. Res. 18 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-03-26H.J. Res. 25 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (70-28)
2025-03-26H.J. Res. 25 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28)
2025-03-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-43)
2025-03-26End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-03-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-03-26End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-03-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-03-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-03-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (56-44)
2025-03-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-44)
2025-03-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)

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.

← PrevPage 15 / 18Next →