We must tell Republicans in the House that we are NOT okay with New Jerseyans footing the bill and going hungry all so that they can give tax cuts to billionaires. 2/2
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New Jersey
Andy Kim
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 825
Yes31%
No68%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align94%
Cross-party4%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Andy Kim
U.S. SenatorDemocratNew Jersey
SoupScore
Andy's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 33 sponsored · 239 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
I'm hearing from folks all across New Jersey about how Republicans' dangerous cuts will take food away from seniors, children, and other vulnerable communities. 1/2
Any vote other than a full repeal of the SALT cap is a vote to raise taxes on New Jerseyans.
I wrote a letter to Rep. Tom Kean, Jr. to remind him of his promise and the constituents he has to answer to.
Yesterday, Senate Republicans betrayed the American people.
Will House Republicans follow in their footsteps or have the courage to put their constituents before billionaire interests?
Reposted bySenator Andy Kim
LIVE ON AIR | Join a bonus episode of The Impossible State with @kim.senate.gov & @victordcha.bsky.social on the key challenges and opportunities of U.S.-Japan-Korea trilateral ties.
Recorded live at our June 18 trilateral forum.
WATCH: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPT0...
Rabiyatu's and Roseanny's stories are unfortunately not unique. I think we can all agree that college costs too damn much right now.
Taking away opportunities for students is no way to lead. House Republicans must show courage and reject their Big Disastrous Bill once and for all.
My joint statement with @booker.senate.gov on the nomination of Alina Habba for U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey.
Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk don’t need more money.
House Republicans have a choice: tax cuts for billionaires or health care for 16 million Americans.
Senate Republicans just passed a massive tax cut for billionaires, and are handing the bill to hard working New Jerseyans by cutting $200 billion in food assistance.
The fight is NOT over. Let’s put pressure on all House Republicans to save SNAP and vote down this harmful bill.
The fight continues.
Senate Republicans failed a simple test of courage despite knowing the devastation it could cause all of us.
But, this is by no means a done deal. As the bill heads back to the House, we must put pressure on Republicans there.
Let's keep making noise.
Reposted bySenator Andy Kim
Republicans snuck in a line that'd make it harder for people to become home care workers for seniors and people with disabilities.
Senator Kim forced a vote to try to take it out.
Republicans voted NO.
Around 3am, I introduced an amendment to support home and community based health care workers, and Republicans voted it down.
This is a direct betrayal of the hard working people who take care of those we love the most.
Reposted bySenator Andy Kim
It appears that this bill might be too big and not beautiful enough for some of my Republican colleagues.
If we stand together, we can fight back against these cuts to Medicaid, increased energy costs, and skyrocketing deficits.
Reposted bySenator Andy Kim
Democrats cut child poverty nearly in half by expanding the Child Tax Credit.
Republicans’ Big, Beautiful Bill denies 22 million low-income kids the full benefits they deserve—while also robbing 16 million kids of their free school lunches.
It's billionaires before kids.
22 hours in on this Big Disastrous Bill, and there’s a reason why the Republicans are flailing: they know it’s reckless and wrong.
We’re going to keep the pressure on. Please help us spread the word.
Reposted bySenator Andy Kim
There are plenty of words to describe Republicans' effort to cut off families’ access to health care, nutritious meals, home heating, and more.
Tonight I asked my @democrats.senate.gov colleagues to tell me one word they'd use.
I know first-hand how hard and scary it is to care for an aging loved one. Republicans in the Senate do too, yet they're trying to take away health care for millions of seniors across America, stripping them of the dignity and decency they deserve.
LIHEAP is a program that helps 6 million Americans survive through both heatwaves and cold winters. Senate Republicans are trying to use their Big Disastrous Bill we're voting on right now to cut it.
Here's how LIHEAP provides lifesaving support to New Jerseyans.
Hers is just one example of how Medicaid cuts would devastate families across this country.
I'm fighting for people like Theresa, Dylan, and Max, and I hope you'll join me. 2/2
"Without Medicaid, my children would go without basic healthcare."
Thank you, Theresa, for having the courage to share your story. I urge you to read how Medicaid has changed Theresa and her twin boys' lives. 1/2
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History825 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
825 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-04-04 | 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) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (73-25) |
| 2025-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-31) |
| 2025-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (62-30) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (63-32) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (64-33) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (54-46) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (27-73) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-38, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | S. 331 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (84-16) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-40) |
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.